A eT ei i Be ee es et
. Fey bee Doe r
—_ ek eS. Sooo steed r noes,
Oe La err tby on; canst Ptesde Te
M £-OL OE Oo . “
NOD Ohms < ils atch tee og. ES, ee
PAN A Hitt 90 ARS agg Sy tate
nt
ae ee ¢ > a, - on
RRS SN teed See no
IO om 06
&
Mien te
© 258
Fae Aa Pipi oiemg
SPAT Ot e - oe 1 Aaa
BON tO tenet anor ee
7 * = = s
etna RePa . PADS,
oN be Mone ty “5
A tise Tih at aes oe
rit
Peiftne ae
Meet om
MIE bmn
ROADS nt OY
Bry 4027 egal ‘ . egy Ps ate = ; ars
oe ee : Eee tra ae ge PIR Re Sai ee % Sn NESE ~ SE ee TRONS ;
Nath ae Pi — ; ne? el Hi Shee a 4 nen ! y an a “ ei ot ae ee y TN as
PW Na Sree die md hy ind Wu eet see 0 oh SE PH mn :
Re dae fat re < te AE ing as
. “ a 4 te Saws ithetnteeee ——
£7 Pte? <4. nk hae ae one.
“rs ; ty PAN Boe
ter
Peete metid oe
ON Pt nag
Fite ons,
= 5 i eee Pty
7 > 3 . nes hpehy agi Wea teak
Peta =. : penal 7 plein aaicte eae ae ee
pag bi sce ae i < * a ee
- > pe mh Se —e
ae ogee Sr ee > ATi. deat tern Soot wee
; ; . > 2 “Keath thes ne 4 P nadee Darres
ee arn Plana os tite ;
EFS tite ;
ARE alm
Senedd din pe Sr ee a ee
Sse epg ee I Rigel
ee
4 eit ae
Se PPD Sern ym nape ge epigang Dan Ae
ey baie a i Ol mo omy afin Il = es . a —
ae S " aed aM tun = <n oe
Plbpe lei, oh ot
tah nea meat pena epi
Bs Pa rian eee m0
Se eae ee
tlt wD,
sete. ce
i
SO 4K oR ee.
PEED gam a, ot Mie a eae a < ad
es ices
ee ies a * :
2
hae Pape ee ag,
Se oe a
eo eae
bets aie ee Sn oe hans 59 y bee
ge PR AE ee eR Se eA een wy _
POS
+ A¥, ~~ 7 - ‘
YLILSNI NVINOSHIINS sstavVagdit LIBRARIES OMITMSONIAN INSTITUT
Saluvyuait
INSTITUTION
S31uvyuagit
INSTITUTION
saiuvualy
‘ARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILOALILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31uVva
NVINOSHLINS
SMITHSONIAN
wht fr
4
NVINOSHLIWS
NVINOSHLIWS
VLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31YVYGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN. INSTITUT
RIES
OLLNLILSNI
NOILNLILSNI
NOILNLILSNI
N
ARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI “S31uvy
I7_ LIBRARIES, SMITHSONIAN
NVINOSHLINS
SJINVYUGIT LIBRA
INSTITUTION
INSTITUTION
INSTITUTION
NLILSNI SMITHSONIAN INSTITU”
.
Ut
ra
” 4
tARIES SMITHSONIAN _INSTITUTION
S SAId¥VvVusIT LIBRARIES
SMITHSONIAN
NVINOSHLINS S31IY¥Vvus
NVINOSHLIWS
SMITHSONIAN
SMITHSONIAN
’ ».
NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31uVvya
cn
LIBRARIES
LIBRARIES
i a
NLILSNI NVYINOSHLINS S3!1¥vud!It LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN _INSTITU’
+
@i1 LIBRARIES
RARITIES SMITHSONIAN
INSTITUTION NOILALILSNI
INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI
saluvudi
Saluvyugl
Sa1uy
INSTITUTION NOILONLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31uv4
NVINOSHLIWS
NVINOSHLIWS
SMITHSONIAN
NVINOSHLIWS
SSIYVYGIT LIBRARIES _SMITHSONIAN_ INSTITUT
S SMITHSONIAN
LILSNI
A
NVINOSHLIWS
Cae tame whee =6Eh UC ee lr Ol Oe Ce me MEN ENN Te VNMIETTIOUINIAIN TNOTEETUO TT
5 tp
be Gs
NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31uVvua
S3luvygs
INSTITUTION
Sjiuvugit
INSTITUTION
ee yyy git
ARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION
.
ILILSNI_ NVINOSHLINS
NVINOSHLIWS
NVINOSHLIWS
SMITHSONIAN
NVINOSHLINWS
S3!IYVYGIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTI
RARIES SMITHSONIAN
: z . g
z : < -
= 4 oo 4
= a8) = oO. .
(e) “BRS = oO om oO
= J z ar =
ARI eget TUTION NOILNLILSNI NWINOSHLINS S31INWUEs
<
S) Be o ~ 5
i = t nee =
>. oa = A >
E> Fe . E
eS as Le = i
ae eh Ce m Oe
ALILSNI_ NVINOSHLINS Sa IyYvuag Houl BRARI ES SMITHSONIAN _ INSTITUT
5 = . x Ks = 3
z = 2 wW So z
oO am ts oO a ie =i O
at = i= x = -
te Se :
TARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS S31YVY
. iP : F i
oo = ox = ox
< > = < + % <
re a bar ‘oe sar ra
co — (ae) = fo)
—< Me! oO os ro) an
pa rs al z ae
NVINOSHLINS S3!Iu¥VvVuUsIT LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUT
i 2 = ci a F cn
w = ow = ow
~ = rad > x a
= = ce ie... “
ARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION NOILNLILSNI NVINOSHLINS Sa1uVva
NVINOSHLIWS
NVINOSHLINS
SMITHSONIAN
NVINOSHLIWS
S SMITHSONIAN
ip, 4,
We
NVINOSHLIWS saiuvuai LIBRARIES SMITHSONIAN INSTITUT
2 on =
Ss
N
N
<j te ee =o tapes — /
BRITSHBIRDS
AN ILLUSTRATED MAGAZINE DEVOTED
vO. the . BIRDS ON THE BRITISH | LIST
EDITED BY
H. F. WITHERBY F.Z.S. M.B.O.U.
ASSISTED BY
W. P. PYCRAFT A.L.S. M.B.0O.U.
Volume II.
JUNE 1908—MAY 1909
WITHERBY & CO.
326 HIGH HOLBORN LONDON.
204413
PREFACE.
THE papers which have appeared in the pages of the
volume now completed do not lose, we venture to think,
by comparison with the contents of Volume I.; while
the increase in the number of contributors may be taken,
not only as an indication that BririsH Brrps justifies its
existence, but no less as a sign that the study of our
native avifauna is being pursued in a wider, and yet
more thorough fashion than heretofore.
In the excellent series of articles on ‘“ Early British
Ornithologists and their Works,” we have been given a
glimpse into the past, for which our readers will, we feel
sure, join us in thanking Mr. W. H. Mullens, who has
taken infinite pains to give accurate, as well as interesting
information.
The investigation into the causes and spread of Wood-
Pigeon Diphtheria, which we commenced in our first
volume, has been advanced a stage further, and though
the subject bristles with difficulties, we intend, with
Dr. C. B. Ticehurst’s aid, to pursue the enquiry.
The valuable articles and notes on the habits, and
especially the nesting habits of birds, have been a feature
of the volume, and special mention may be made of
Mr. Noble’s paper on the Ducks, and the interesting
correspondence arising therefrom. The study of nestling
birds, hitherto so strangely neglected, has in this volume
made material progress, thanks to the work of Dr. C. B.
Ticehurst and Miss A. Jackson, and we hope for more
contributions on this subject.
Of the manner of the distribution, and the nesting
areas of our summer migrants, our knowledge is meagre,
and the Messrs. Alexanders’ valuable paper illustrating
Iv. BRITISH BIRDS.
their novel method of mapping out the haunts of selected
species was therefore a most welcome contribution, and
will serve as an invaluable model for further work.
Hand in hand with research of this kind is that of
marking birds, and considerable progress in this direction
has recently been made. There are great possibilities in
this method of tracing the movements and so on of
individual birds, and we hope to devote special attention
to it in the future. The subject of geographical races is
linked with these migratory movements, and we are giad
to note that a more general recognition of such races is
being made. Our heartiest support will always be
accorded to all who are endeavouring to add to our
knowledge in this direction.
Finally, we may refer to the articles on the additions
to our knowledge of British Birds recorded since 1899,
and now that these are complete, our readers will be
enabled to acquire an up-to-date knowledge of the subject
by ‘consulting Howard Saunders’ ‘“ Manual,” and the
indices of the volumes of this Magazine. To keep these
records up-to-date month by month, with the help of our
contributors, and by reference to every contribution of
interest . published elsewhere, will be our constant
endeavour.
THE EDpDITors.
May Ist, 1909.
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.
Typical Feathers from Ducks’ Nests. (Reproduced
direct from the feathers) Platel .. .. Frontispiece
Male example of SCHLEGEL’s PETREL ((Hstrelata neglecta)
found dead at ee Cheshire. re
by Alfred Newstead) .
Nest and Eggs of SHORT-EARED cate Fania at Ra
worth, Notts. (Photographed by H. E. Forrest) .
Typical Feathers from Ducks’ Nests. (Reprodncd
direct from the feathers) Plate2 .. . facing
‘<The Survey of Cornwall,” by Richard Cuter ee
simile of Title Page) ..
Markings in Mouths of Nestlings of the Pen Ter
Sketch Map to show the distribution of Woop-PIGEON
DIPHTHERIA
Nest of Common TERN :
Pebble-paved Nest of Arcric ion on adel
Arctic TERN’s Nest in Sand
Arctic TERN sitting on Nest in Sand
Arctic TERN’s Nest in high-water mark Drift
Male LarGE-BILLED ReEED-BUNTING, obtained near
Lydd, Kent
LirtLe TERN on its Nest. Romney Marsh. (Photo-
graphed by F. B. Kirkman) Plate 3 .. facing
Arctic TERN’s Nest, with Pebbles and Bent ..
Lesser TErn’s Nest in Shingle at Romney Marsh
Common TeErn’s Nest of Broom at Romney Marsh
eeminax Rerum ....... Britannicarum,” by Christopher
Merrett. (Facsimile of Title Page)
Sketch Map illustrating flight of StaRLINGS
PAGE
15
30
o7
VI. BRITISH BIRDS.
GREEN WOODPECKER. i i oy Miss Turner)
Plate 4.. rs . facing
Guarding the Entrance. (Phiotogiannted ay Miss Banas
Old English Nesting Bottles
KILLDEER PLOVER, shot near Lydd, rene
‘“A Late Voyage to St. Kilda,” a M. Martin. (Fac-
simile of Title Page) . : , >
Sketch Map of St. Kilda ..
Nest of MArsH-WARBLER in Somerset Pe
Diagram showing the Down-tracks of Nestling Birds. .
Nest of Scaup-Duck. (Photographed by P. H. Bahr). .
Duck and Drake Scaup and pause Site. (Drawn by
P. a Bahr)
The Duck Scavue coming , off the Naat (Drawn by
P. A Bahr)
Nest of Turrep Duck in the same hollow as the
Scaup’s Nest. (Photographed by P. H. Bahr)
Plate from Plot’s ‘‘ Natural History of Staffordshire,”
showing the taking of young “ Pewits.”’ Plate 5
facing
PALLAS’s GRASSHOPPER-WARBLER, picked up dead at
the Rockabill Lighthouse (co. Dublin)
Aquatic WARBLER, Eastbourne, Sussex. (Drawn by
KE. C. ARNOLD) = s%
A Tame SNIPE and its habits. Figs. 1-8
THOMAS PENNANT. (From the Engraving by J. aa
after the Painting by 'T. Gainsborough)
Diagrams illustrating the length of wings of the Gamma
LAND and ComMMoN WHEATEAR
Drawing illustrating amputation of Lavwrhet S ae by
means of Wool
BuLWER’S PETREL, picked up near vite Sussex
“The Ornithology of Francis Willughby,” by John
Ray. (Facsimile of Title Page) Plate 6 .. facing
JOHN Ray. (From the Engraving by H. eae Bios a
Picture in the British Museum) .
Facsimile of Entry in Parish Register of John Ray: s
Baptism, and that of another John Ray ..
LIST OF ILLUSFRATIONS.
’ Site of a Rostin’s Nest after a Snowstorm
LirtLe TERN on the Nest, Spurn, Yorkshire. (Photo-
graphed by Oxley Grabham) Plate 7 .. facing
LirtLe TERN—KEggs in a slight scoop on fine sand.
(Photographed by Oxley Grabham) ..
LirtLe TERN—Newly-hatched Young. (Photographed
by Oxley Grabham) =e
LirrLe TERN calling to her Mate. (Photographed by
Oxley Grabham)
LirtLe TrrRN on the Nest. (Photographed by Oxley
Grabham) ar
Map showing the haunts of some Migrants in Part of
the Borough of Tunbridge Wells
THomas Bewicx. (From the Engraving by F. haan
after the Picture by James Ramsay)
‘“* History of British Birds.” (Facsimile of Title Pee)
GrorRGE Montaau. (From the Original Miniature in
the possession of the Linnzean Society, London)
Diagram of ring used for ae Birds at the Rossitten
Station. .
Male BLACK-THROATED pest ee at Regan
Kent
Immature Female BuAack and Run Gite, eer rer
shot near Bala, North Wales
Witit1am Macainiivray. (from the nature ii
Vertebrate Fauna of the Outer Hebrides.’’)
WILLIAM YARRELL (after the Frontispiece by F. A.
Heath, to the 3rd Edition of Yarrell’s “ cae of
British Fishes ’’) : :
A nesting haunt of the Goosinuee
°
i. i pee
he Pea) ey eee
"
‘EGGS OF PALAARCTIC BIRDS. | —
-A Work on this gubject, ‘illustrated with BEAUTIFULLY
COLOURED PLATES, is now. being issued.
Write for Full Prsaeshes and a Part for inspection to
: WILLIAMS & NORGATE,
4%, Henrietta Street, Covent Garden, London, W.C.
~ DALLMEYER'S
Naturalists’ Camera,
; 1907 MODEL,
For Telephoto or Ordinary LENSES.
‘DALLMEYER'S
_ Lenses are used
by the most
~~ skilled Bird |
Photographers.
The following ave.
spectally recommended :
THE STIGMATIC SERIES i F/6 (Convertible)
THE SERIES D PATENT PORTRAIT LENSES F 6.
(A Rapid Long Focus Lens‘at.a Moderate Price.)
High or Moderate Power Telephoto Lenses (Original Make). aj
We are Specialists i in Cameras and Apparatus for edie ge
CATALOGUES AND ADVICE. FREE.
Jo H. DALLMEYER, LimiTeD, DENZIL RD.
Showrooms: 25, NEWMAN es W.. “NEASDEN, LONDON, a! g ce
WATKINS & DONCASTER,
2 aturalists, - bis Gee
And Manufacturers of CABINETS and APPARATUS for Entomology, Birds’: Fags ae
and Skins, and all Branches of Natural History. ‘
& LARGE STOCK OF INSECTS, and BIRDS’ EGGS and SKINS. A Ry gs
Speciality : —Objects for Nature Study, Drawing Classes, &c.
BIRDS, MAMMALS, &c,, PRESERVED and MOUNTED hy FIRST-GLASS WORKMEN |
TRUE TO NATURE.
All Books and Publications on Natural History mingled:
36, STRAND, LONDON, W.C. (Five Doors doo Seis Gross.) af
Catalaras (102 pp.) pees free.
&
BRITISH BIRDS, Vol. I1., Pl. 7.
TypicaL FEATHERS FROM Ducks’ NEsTs.
Nat. size.
(Reproduced direct from the feathers.) (For explanation see p. 23).
DNTIDSABIRDS
POTD BY. H. F. WITHERBY, F.ZS., M.BO.U.
peeve ley BY W. P. PYCRAFT, ALS, M.BO.U.
ConTENTS OF NuMBER 1, Vor. II. June 1, 1908.
Editorial . pe ‘ se Page 1
Some Early British Gea nolacicts ea their Worked by
W. H. Mullens, M.a., Lu.M.,. M.B.0.U. i aera
Turner be ; 5
On the Occurrence of Ealecal's Petrel ( Geri eiTooeas
in Cheshire: a new British and European Bird, by
Robert Newstead, a.u.s., and T. A. Coward, F.z.s... 14
On the Identification of Ducks’ Bees, by feohpe Noble,
M.B.0.U. (Plate I.) . 18
On the More eaeeant Additions to our aeeendie of
British Birds since 1899, by H. F. Witherby and N. F.
Ticehurst. Part X. (continued from Vol. I., page 350). . 24
Notes :—Aquatic Warbler in Cornwall (C. B. Ticehurst).
White Wagtail in Cornwall (C. B. Ticehurst). Blue-
Headed Wagtail in Nottinghamshire (J. Whitaker).
An Escaped Nutcracker (G. M. Beresford-Webb). The
Black Woodpecker in England (Thos. Southwell).
Short-Eared Owl Breeding in Nottinghamshire (J.
Whitaker). Eiders off South Devon in April (K. S.
Smith): Stock-Dove Nesting on Buildings (B. B.
Riviere). Spotted Crake in Sussex (C. B. Ticehurst).
Kentish Plover in Cheshire (T. A. Coward). Purple
Sandpiper in the Channel Islands (C. B. Ticehurst).
Redshank Breeding in Warwickshire (A. G. Leigh).
Black Tern in Cheshire (T. A. Coward). Birds in Norfolk
in 1907 (J. H. Gurney). A Plan for Marking Birds
(H. F. W.). Marked Birds (C. B. Ticehurst), etc. ae 28
EDITORIAL.
THANKS to the generous support accorded it during its
first year of life, and to that which has been promised
already for the future, BritisH Brrps enters upon its
second year with the prospect of a useful career before it.
The programme, which we are already able to announce,
for the next twelve months is sufficient in itself to show
that there will be no falling off in the interest of our
pages ; but, on the contrary, as the year wears on, doubt-
less we shall receive many other articles in every way as
2 BRITISH BIRDS.
attractive and as valuable as those we have now the good
fortune to announce. Of these, some, we hope, will bear
on the themes to be presently suggested.
Not the least interesting matter in our new programme
will be, we venture to think, the series of essays on Karly
British Ornithologists and their Work, by Mr. W. H.
Mullens. As many of our readers doubtless know, there
are few men so able to appraise the work of these old
authors as Mr. Mullens, who has for some time been
engaged in the study of these early authors, and during
that time he has brought together an extensive collection
of their books, many of which are quite inaccessible to the
working ornithologist, and these are to be drawn upon for
our benefit. There are some, indeed, who seem inclined
to decry the labours of these pioneers—who mark only
the inaccurate and, sometimes, absurd statements which
passed with them for knowledge, and forget how difficult
were the conditions under which they were compelled to
labour. But the spirit of kindly appreciation shown by
Mr. Mullens will enable us to realize that libraries in those
days, even where they existed, were not easily accessible ;
and the dangers and difficulties of travel, even within
the confines of Great Britain, were greater than we can
readily imagine. We are, in short, inclined to forget that
we have entered into their labours, and have built upon
the foundations which they laid.
There are many aspects of the bionomical, or, as some
prefer to call it, the cecological side of our study which
demand more attention than they have generally met
with among ornithologists of this country. And we hope
that some of our readers may be induced to send us
contributions on such subjects, for example, as bear upon
the influence of climate on plumage, and on the inter-
relations of species. On this last theme, there are
several important cases awaiting systematic investiga-
tion: such, for instance, as the effect of the increasing
numbers of Starlings on the Woodpecker; and of the
decrease in the Swallow-tribe through the pugnacity of
the House-Sparrow. How much of truth is there in the
isolated statements which, of recent years, have been
made on these subjects? Many other kindred problems
will doubtless suggest themselves to our readers.
——
Ss
EDITORIAL. 3
The subject of Economic Ornithology in this country
has been scandalously neglected. So far, scraps of in-
formation, mostly incorrect and gathered at haphazard,
generally by strongly biassed partizans, have been made
to serve our needs. No attempt to remedy this state of
affairs can possibly meet with success which is not made
in all seriousness, and carried out on strictly scientific
lines. One cannot “‘ dabble” with a problem of this kind.
We had hoped very much to be able to carry on a pre-
liminary investigation of the kind we are so anxious to
see carried out, but a careful calculation has convinced
us that the cost of such an enterprise would be prohibitive.
We must again express the hope that an investigation
will be undertaken by the Board of Agriculture, as has
long been done, both on the Continent and in America, and
with magnificent results. To carry conviction such an
investigation must be prosecuted by an impartial body,
and one which can command the services of fully qualified
experts, whose work must be carried out under conditions
which leave no loophole for doubt.
In the present number will be found the first section
of an article framed for the purpose of facilitating the
identification of Ducks’ eggs—a by no means easy matter.
Read with the help of the coloured plates which the
generosity of the author enables us to provide, we feel
sure that this contribution will overcome the difficulty
that has hitherto existed in the determination of doubtful
cases.
Among other articles already promised we may mention
the following: Mr. Boyd Alexander on the British
migrants which he met with in his last great journey
from the Niger to the Nile; Mr. E. Bidwell on Cuckoo
fosterers; Mr. J. L. Bonhote on British birds which have
bred in captivity; Mr. W. H. Kirkman on variations
in the nest-building of the Common and Arctic Terns ;
Commander H. Lynes on the habits of our summer
birds when on migration in the Mediterranean ; Mr.
M. J. Nicoll on the moult of the Swallow; and
Prof. Lloyd Morgan on some aspects of the psychology
of nest-building, or some kindred theme to be determined
by him later. That this will prove a welcome and valuable
contribution there is no need to doubt, for Prof. Morgan
4 BRITISH BIRDS.
is the greatest authority on this difficult subject in this
country.
As we have already announced, the articles on ‘‘ Addi-
tions to our Knowledge of British Birds since 1899” will
be continued and completed in the present volume, and
the results of the Wood-Pigeon enquiry will be given by
Dr. C. B. Ticehurst in an early issue. Other contributors _
to last year’s volume will interest us again, and photo-
graphy, as an aid to our science, will be to the fore.
We have given an outline of our programme; but let
no intending contributor think that our space is exhausted.
We shall always find room for anything which we think
should be put before the readers of BriTisH BrrDs.
Finally, we need hardly say that we shall continue to
make a feature of ‘‘ Notes,” which, we hope, will increase
in number and importance, while we shall make a point,
as hitherto, of extracting from all sources information of
importance to the student of British birds, and thus
provide a current history of the subject; and in this
connection we must again ask our readers’ help by draw-
ing attention to papers and records which have escaped
our notice.
THE EDITORS.
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS
AND THEIR WORKS.
BY
W. H. MULLENS, M.a., LL.M., M.B.O.U.
I—WILLIAM TURNER
(circa 1500—1568).
Tue history of British ornithology may be said to commence
from the time of William Turner, famous both as a naturalist
and anauthor. Born just 400 years ago, this illustrious
man, who is styled the “ Father of English Botany,” is
perhaps best known for his researches in that department
of natural history ; but he also excelled in several branches
of zoology, and his claim to be considered the earliest
responsible authority on the birds of this country is
undeniable.
Before Turner’s time, the available knowledge concerning
British birds was small indeed. It is true that a quaint
and very credulous writer, Giraldus Cambrensis (1146-1223)
had in his Topography of Ireland (written in 1187, and
first published in 1587) devoted ten chapters to a description
of the birds of that country, but his observations, although
made at first hand, are confused and unreliable, and more
curious than instructive.* Passing mention of certain
birds is also to be found in the itineraries of some of the
earlier English writers, ¢.9., William of Worcester (ob. 1480),
and John Leland (ob. 1552), and some information con-
cerning the Hawks and Game Birds can be obtained from
the old books of the chase—the most famous example of
which is The Boke of St. Albans, containing the Treatises
of Hawking, Hunting, and Coat-Armour, printed at St.
Albans, 1486, and attributed to Dame Juliana Barnes, or
* cf. also Forrest, “ The Fauna of North Wales,”’ p. XXv.
6 BRITISH BIRDS.
Berners. The early forest laws, and the different Acts
of Parliament enjoining the protection or destruction
of certain birds, may also be consulted with advantage,
but these necessarily include only a few species in their
enactments.
Small as the knowledge of birds was in this country, it
can hardly be said to have stood in better case in Continental
Europe. There the study of natural history had made
little or no advance since the days of Aristotle and Pliny.
It had been, in common with much else, enveloped and
obscured in the intellectual gloom of the Middle Ages.
Those few medizeval writers who concerned themselves
with the subject of natural history were content to derive
their information from the great Greek and Latin authors
of the classic age, and while attempting in no way to improve
or elaborate such information, they rather, in the spirit of
the age in which they wrote, disguised it with a mass of
superstition and ignorance. It must, of course, be
remembered that their books were chiefly written with a
medicinal purpose, and that their object was to set forth
the various strange curative properties which they ascribed
to the component parts of the birds and beasts they
mentioned, rather than to study or describe the animals
themselves. Among the more prominent medizval authors
who treated of birds at any considerable length, it may
here suffice to mention the following :—Albertus Magnus
(ob. 1282), whose twenty-six books, De Animalibus, were
printed in 1478; Vicentius Belovacensis (ob. 1264),
whose Speculum Nature was published at Strasburg about
the same date; and Bartholomew de Glanville, commonly
known as Bartholomeus Anglius (fl. 1230-1255), from
whose famous work, De Proprietatibus Rerum, first printed
at Basle, circa 1470, we can obtain a good idea of the
general state of knowledge concerning natural history in
the Middle Ages. Mention should also be made of a
work entitled (1)Ortus Sanitatis, commonly ascribed to
Johannes de Cuba, and published at Mainz in 1475. This,
though professedly a herbal, deals in its third tractatus
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 7
with “ Birds and Flying-Things,” and being the first printed
book to contain illustrations of birds, must always be of
interest to the student of early ornithology.
It was not until the middle of the sixteenth century that
the general revival of learning throughout Europe touched
the study of ornithology in particular, and that of natural
history in general. This revival, as far as it affected
ornithology, was largely due to the illustrious Conrad
Gesner (1516-1565), and his able contemporaries, Pierre
Belon (1517-1564), author of L’ Histoire de la Nature des
Oyseaux (Paris, 1555), Gybertus Longolius (1507-1543),
who wrote the Dialogus de Avibus, and William Turner,
the subject of this article. In no way inferior in ability
to the authors mentioned, Turner was in point of publication
their leader, his book Aviwm ... . historia, appearing
in 1544, eleven years before the ornithological works of
Belon and Gesner were printed.
William Turner* was born at the beginning of the
sixteenth century at Morpeth, in Northumberland, the
exact date of his birth bemg unknown, as the registers of
his native town date only from the year 1582. He is said
to have been the son of a tanner, but of his childhood and
early education we have no record. Through the influence
of Thomas, Lord Wentworth, Turner in due course became
a member of Pembroke Hall, Cambridge, where he graduated
B.A. 1529-30. He became a Fellow of his College in 1531,
and its Senior Treasurer in 1538. His M.A. degree he
commenced in 1533. How long he retained his Fellowship
is uncertain. Mr. Jackson thinks he may have held it
until his marriage with Jane, daughter of George Ander,
alderman of Cambridge.
At Cambridge, Turner was a contemporary of the famous
John Caius, founder of the college which bears his name,
and also one of our earliest writers on natural history (his
De rariorum animalium atque stirpium Hrstoria was
* The particulars of Turner’s life are derived from those given in
the facsimile reprint of Turner’s ‘“Libellus de re Herbaria,” by
Benjamin Daydon Jackson, F.L.S., privately printed, London, 1877.
1 vol., 4to.
8 BRITISH BIRDS.
published at London, 1570). It was probably during his
residence at Cambridge that Turner first directed his
attention to the study of birds, while there, no doubt the
fascination of the Fens fell upon him, as it has fallen on so
many since his time, and it was in the Fens that many of
his most valuable observations were made on birds which,
then resident, are now only known as rare stragglers to
this country. It seems unlikely that Turner could have
devoted much time to natural history before he went to the
University, as he himself informs us that he had never seen
the nest of the Water Ousel or Dipper, a somewhat curious
fact when we remember that he was a native of Northumber-
land.
It was in 1538, while still at Cambridge, that Turner
published his first work on natural history, entitled :—
Libellus de / re Herbaria Novvs, / in quo her-
barum aliquot no- / mina Greca, Latina &
Anglica / habes, vna cum nomini- / bus officin-
arum, in / gratiam stu- / diose iuuentutis nunc
pri- / mum in lucem / editus.
Such was the prevailing ignorance of those times
that, writing thirty years later, he bitterly complains
that he could get no assistance in his work from his
contemporaries :—
‘“ Wher as I could learne never one Greke, neither
Latin, nor English name, even amongest the Phisicions
of any herbe or tre, suche was the ignorance in simples
at that tyme, and as yet there was no Englishe Herbal
but one, al full of unlearned Cacographees and falselye
naming of herbes.”’
During his stay at Cambridge, Turner became an
intimate friend of Nicholas Ridley (1500-1555), and of
Hugh Latimer, Ridley’s fellow martyr at the stake.
From Ridley, Turner received his first instruction in
Greek, and, influenced by the teaching of the Reformers,
he now embraced those religious views for which he
laboured so zealously during the remainder of his life.
Leaving his University he travelled through a consider-
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 9
able part of England, preaching, and while at Oxford he
was imprisoned for: preaching “ without a call.’’ When,
** At length being let loose, and banished, he travelled
into Italy.”
In Italy Turner studied botany under Luca Ghini, at
Bologna, and took the degree of M.D. either at that
University or at Ferrara. Continuing his travels, he
visited the illustrious Conrad Gesner, at Zurich, and
became a firm friend and trusted correspondent of that
great naturalist.
Turner seems to have been at Basle in 1543, and the
following year at Cologne. From this latter place he
issued in 1544 his Aviwm Precipuarum ... . hostoria,
dedicated to Edward, Prince of Wales (afterwards
Edward VI.), and in the same year the posthumous work
of his friend, Gybertus Longolius, of Utrecht (1507-1543),
entitled Dialogus de Avibus. Turner’s polemical works.
now followed each other in quick succession, and were
prohibited by a proclamation of Henry VIII. On the
death of that monarch, Turner returned to England,
and whilst waiting for ecclesiastical preferment acted as
physician to the Lord Protector, Somerset.
At length, after several disappointments, Turner
obtained the Deanery of Wells in 1550.
The accession of Queen Mary saw Turner again a
fugitive, and his writings were once more prohibited in
England, and ordered to be destroyed wherever found.
He returned to his native country when Elizabeth
succeeded her sister, and was reinstated in his Deanery.
In 1564, however, he was again suspended for non-
conformity, and took up his abode in London. ‘There
he died on the 7th July, 1568, and was buried in the
Church of St. Olave, Crutched Friars, where may be seen
a tablet to his memory erected by his widow.
The book on which Turner’s fame as an ornithologist
rests has the following title :—
“ Avium / Precipu / arum, quarum / apud
Plinium et Ari- / stotelem mentio est, brevis
10 BRITISH BIRDS.
& / succincta historia. / Ex optimis quibusque
scripto- / ribus Contexta, Scholio illu / strata
& aucta. / Adjectis nominibus Grecis, Ger-
manicis & / Britannicis. / Per Dn. Guilielmum
Turnerum, artium & Me- / dicine doctorem /
Coloniz excudebat Ioan. Gymnicus, / Anno
M.D.XLIIT.”’
1 Vol., 8vo., pages unnumbered, 157 (cf. bts, 1899, p. 153).
The above is the first edition. It was reprinted by
Dr. George Thackeray, Provost of King’s College,
Cambridge, in 1823; the reprint is said to be as rare as
the original—and again by Mr. A. H. Evans, in 1903,
at the Cambridge University Press—Mr. Evans’ edition
contains a full translation and many valuable notes.
Turner’s object in writing this work is set out both
in the title and in the EHpistola Nuncupatoria thereof.
This was to determine the principal kinds of birds named
by Aristotle and Pliny in their writings. In addition
to this, he also added copious notes on those species
which came under his own immediate observation,
‘and in so doing he has produced the first book on birds
which treats them in anything like a scientific spirit,”
and not merely from a medical point of view. But the
great value of Turner’s work consists in the fact that he
is always most careful to tell us whether he observed the
birds he describes in England or abroad, and it is for this
reason that his comments are of such importance to the
student of British ornithology. It must here suffice to
give a few short extracts.
Speaking of the Crane, he says :—‘‘ The smaller, that
is, younger, Cranes, are called by Pliny, Vipiones, as
young Doves are known as Pipiones. Cranes, moreover,
breed in England in marshy places; I myself have often
seen their pipers [young Pigeons are still called pipers
in England], though some people born away from England
urge that this is false ” (cf. Evans’ Ed., p. 97).
And of the Kite, or ‘‘ Kyte ” :—‘“‘ I know two sorts of
Kites, the greater and the less; the greater is in colour
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 11
nearly rufous, and in England is abundant and remark-
ably rapacious. This kind is wont to snatch food out of
children’s hands, in our cities and towns. The other
kind is smaller, blacker, and more rarely haunts cities.
This I do not remember to have seen in England... .”
(cf. Evans Id., p. 117).
His remarks on the Black Tern, which ceased to breed
in this country about the middle of the last century,
the last recorded eggs having been taken in Norfolk in
1858, are also of considerable importance, especially
when we consider that this bird still visits the British
Isles with unfailing regularity :—‘‘ There is another
small bird of. this kind called Stern* in local dialect,
which is so like the sea Lari that it seems to differ
from them only in its size and colour; for it is a
Larus, though smaller than the sea Lari, and blacker.
Throughout the whole of summer, at which time it breeds,
it makes such an unconscionable noise that by its
unrestrained clamour it almost deafens those who live
near lakes and marshes. This, I certainly believe to be
the bird whose vile garrulity gave rise to the old proverb
‘Larus partavit.’ It is almost always flying over lakes
and swamps, never at rest, but always open-mouthed for
prey. This bird nests in thick reed-beds” (cf. Evans’
Hd., p: 79). |
The care and trouble which Turner took in verifying
the statements of Aristotle and Pliny is shown in the
following passage :—‘* The Mergus [7.e., Cormorant], a
sad-coloured bird, is nearly equal to a goose in size, with
the bill long and hooked at the end; it is web-footed,
heavy in the body, and the attitude is upright in the
sitting bird. Pliny writes that it nests on trees, but
Aristotle says on sea-rocks. What each man saw or
learnt from the reports: of bird-catchers, he has set down
in writing. And I have observed both birds myself,
for I have seen Mergi nesting on sea-cliffs about the
mouth of the Tyne river, and on lofty trees in Norfolk
with the Herons” (cf. Evans’ Ed., p. 111).
* «The Black Tern (Sterna nigra).”’
12 BRITISH BIRDS.
- The following affords us some idea of the value in which
the Godwit was held as a table bird :—‘* Furthermore, the
bird (which ‘the English call the Godwit, or Fedoa ’*)
is so much like the Woodcock that, if it were not a little .
larger, and did not the breast verge upon ash-colour,
the one of them could hardly be distinguished from the
other. It is found in marshy places and on river banks.
The beak is long; but in captivity it feeds on wheat,
just as our Pigeons do. With us it sells for thrice as much
again as any Woodcock, so much does its flesh tickle the
palates of our magnates ”’ (cf. Evans’ Ed., p. 45).
Equally interesting are his observations of the Hobby,
Hen-Harrier, Water Ousel (or Dipper),+ Bald-Buzzard
(or Marsh-Harrier), Osprey, Wheatear, Sandpiper,
Fieldfare, Cuckoo, Black-headed Gull, and many other
birds, and though he fell into the prevailing error
with regard to the generation of the Bernacle Goose,
the fault was hardly his own. Misled by the accounts
he had read and heard on this subject, he was by
no means convinced, and as he tells us :—‘*‘ Inasmuch
as it seemed hardly safe to trust the vulgar, and
by reason of the rarity of the thing I did not quite credit
Gyraldus [7.e., Giraldus Cambrensis], while I thought on
this, of which I now am writing, I took counsel of a
certain man, whose upright conduct, often proved by me,
had justified my trust, a theologian by profession and an
Irishman by birth, Octavian by name, whether he thought
Gyraldus worthy of belief in this affair.’ The said
Octavian, however, not only informed our author that
the popular fable was a fact, but, further, “ taking oath
upon the very Gospel which he taught,” stated that he
had seen and handled the young Bernacles as they emerged
from the fungi of wood rotted in the sea, and even promised
to forward Turner “some of these growing Chicks.”
* Vide Newton ‘“ Dict. Birds,” p. 248.
+ The name ‘“ Dipper” was first applied to the Water Ouzel by
Marmaduke Tunstall in his ‘‘ Ornithologia Britannica.’’ London.
177il. Ivel., folio.
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 138
Turner was held in great estimation by Gesner, who
quotes him freely in his writings under the title of
Turnerus Anglus (cf. Evans’ Ed., p. x1., etc.). There
is no evidence that Turner studied mammals, but he
certainly published one or more works on ichthyology,
besides supplying Gesner with much information about
the fishes of Great Britain.*
In taking leave of William Turner, it only remains to
add that the authentic books of this remarkable man
number no less than thirty-nine, and to quote the
description of him given by John Ray :—‘ Vir solide
eruditionis et judici.”
* cf. Art. by Rev. H. A. Macpherson, “ Zoologist,’’ 1898, p. 337.
( 4 )
ON THE OCCURRENCE OF SCHLEGEL’S PETREL
(ESTRELATA NEGLECTA) IN CHESHIRE.
A NEW BRITISH AND EUROPEAN BIRD.
BY
ROBERT NEWSTEAD, a.1.s., & T. A. COWARD, F.z.s.
On April Ist, 1908, an example of one of the ‘‘ Dove-
like Fulmars’’ was found dead under a tree near
Tarporley, Cheshire, by a man who attends the weekly
market at Chester. On the fourth day after its dis-
- covery the bird was offered to Mr. Arthur Newstead,
who subsequently purchased it ; it is now in his posses-
sion. The bird, a male, was examined by one of us
while it was still in the flesh, an outline drawing was
made of it, and the colour of the soft parts, the weight,
and other details, carefully noted. The bird was in an
excellent state of preservation, and, as might be expected
with a Petrel, there was no indication that it had been
in captivity.
The distinguishing characters of the bird are as
follows :—Uniformly brown, paler beneath ; forehead and
cheeks faintly mottled; ‘‘ exposed portion of the outer
primary beneath—white towards the base of the inner
web.’’* Tarsi, proximal third of the toes, and webs,
bluish-grey ; the rest of the feet black. Tail very
slightly rounded. Bill black. Irides dark hazel.
The details are :—Upper-surface dark brown, head and
neck decidedly greyer ; all the feathers edged with paler
brown, with the exception of some of the scapulars,
which are also decidedly darker (blackish-brown) than
the feathers of the back; forehead and cheeks mottled
with brown. Under-surface greyish-brown, in a strong
* Salvin, Cat. Birds in coll. Brit. Museum, XXV., p. 397.
SCHLEGEL’S PETREL IN CHESHIRE. 15
light presenting a marked grey reflection; traces of
narrow, interrupted, obscure dark bands on the breast,
which are evident only when closely examined in a good
light. Under tail-coverts dark-brown; bases white.
Under wing-coverts and axillaries brown with paler
margins ; primaries blackish-brown, bases of inner webs
and shafts white. Concealed bases of all the feathers
white, a character most strongly marked on the neck and
Male example of Schlegel’s Petrel (@strelata neglecta) found dead at
Tarporley, Cheshire, April Ist, 1908.
(Photographed by ALFRED NEWSTEAD.)
breast, where the grey-brown tips barely cover the under-
lying portions, so that on the slightest displacement of
the feathers the white proximal portions show distinctly
through.
Total length, 15 inches ; wing 11.1; tail, central and
lateral rectrices, 4; bill, 1.7; tarsus, 1.5; middle and
outer toe, 2.1; inner toe, 1.7. Weight, 16 oz.
* Salvin, op. cit., p. 412.
16 BRITISH BIRDS.
This example agrees best with the dark-breasted
form of @. neglecta (Schlegel), but this species, according
to Salvin,* has the tarsi and basal portions of the toes
yellow. However this may be, we find on comparing
our specimen with an example of the dark-breasted form
of @. neglecta, in the collection of the Liverpool Museum,
and with the specimens in the Natural History Museum,
South Kensington, that they are, we think, specifically
identical. The plumage agrees in almost every detail.
Furthermore, Salvin* states that ‘ great variation
exists as to the colour of the under-surface, some birds
being nearly uniform greyish-brown.”’
. arminjoniana, Gigl. and Salvad., comes very near
it, but this species is said to have the ‘“ under tail-
coverts white,’’t and there are other marked differences.
Both the species hitherto recorded for the British
Isles [Z. hesitata, Kuhl., and @. brevipes (Peale)], belong
to that section of the genus (@strelata. in which the
exposed portion of the outer primary beneath is dark
not white, so that, apart from other differences, the
Cheshire specimen cannot be either of these.
Regardless, therefore, of the difference in the colour of
the feet and legs, we have come to the conclusion that
our specimen is referable to @strelata neglecta, and that
this species should be added to our fauna as a wanderer
to the British Isles. Drs. Bowdler Sharpe and Du Cane
Godman, to whom we showed the specimen, are of
opinion that our conclusion is warranted.
(HZ. neglecta is known only as a South Pacific species ;
it has been obtained in the neighbourhood of the
Kermadec Islands, but little is known about its range.
Apparently it has never before been recorded as
occurring in Europe. On March 25th the wind in
Cheshire veered from the south-east to the west, and
later to the N.N.W. On the 27th it backed to the
S.S.W., rising in force, and remained westerly until the
31st, when, as registered at Manchester, it was blowing
* Salvin, op. cit., p. 412. + Salvin, op. cit., p. 413.
SCHLEGEL’S PETREL IN CHESHIRE. 1a)
with an average velocity of 21 miles an hour. Tarporley
is about 11 miles S.S.E. of the Mersey Estuary, 16 miles
S.E. of the Dee Estuary, some 60 miles E. of Cardigan
Bay, and over 100 miles N. of the Bristol Channel.
From the condition of the bird when found we conclude
that it dropped towards the end of the month, probably
on or about March 31st, when the westerly winds were
at their strongest.
The bird was exhibited at the meeting of the
Zoological Society held on May 12th, and at the meeting
of the British Ornithologists’ Club held on May 20th
last.
Ger
ON THE IDENTIFICATION OF DUCKS’ EGGS.
BY
HEATLEY NOBLE, M.B.0.0v.
(Puate I.)
THE eggs of various species of Anatide are so frequently
sent to me for identification that I have gained some
experience in the matter, and it has been thought that
the results of that experience might be of some interest
to readers of BritisH Birps.
There are three means of identification—(1) the eggs
themselves; (2) the down found in the nests; (3) the
feathers which are generally mixed with the down. The
last provides by far the most important and certain means
of identification, although it is seldom mentioned by
writers on this subject. The down by itself is not
reliable except in isolated cases.
Take, for example, that found in the nests of the
Wigeon and the Shoveler ; it would be a bold ornithologist
who would guarantee to separate the two were they mixed
together. The clue is given by the feathers, those of the
Wigeon being white sometimes with grey centres, and quite
unmistakable. Then, again, the down in different nests
of the same species is often so dissimilar that it appears
to belong to different species. I think I shall be able to
show that if the eggs, down, and feathers are all con-
sidered in relation to each other, identification, if not
absolutely certain, becomes little doubtful.
Occasionally cases arise which are distinctly difficult.
Last season, for instance, a beautiful nest of snow-white
down, with white eggs and white feathers tipped with
grey, was sent me from Ireland. The nest had been taken
in heather, not from a hole, as might be expected from
the colour of the down. It certainly belonged to no —
British, or even European, breeding duck, neither was it
that of any foreign duck usually kept in confinement.
IDENTIFICATION OF DUCKS’ EGGS. tg
The female was eventually shot, and proved to be a
speckled mongrel mallard! Another interesting case
was that of an unmistakable Wigeon’s egg found in a
Wild Duck’s nest, with equally unmistakable down of
the latter. The Wigeon had laid in the same nest after
the larger duck had hatched off. I have known more
than one instance of this, Anas boscas being an early
breeder and the Wigeon much later.
In this article I have been asked to include the
Golden-eye, Velvet Scoter, and Long-tailed Duck.
Although these three have not as yet been proved to have
bred in these islands, there is some evidence that at least
two of the species named may have done so, and there
seems no reason why they should not.
Most of the following remarks are from personal
observation, and, with the exception of the three species
mentioned above, the nests described have been found
by the writer.
ComMonN SHELD-DUCK (T'adorna cornuta).—The eggs
of this bird could hardly be confused with those of any
other British duck except, perhaps, the Goosander.
They are creamy white, rather lighter and more glossy
than those of the latter. The down is light pearl-grey,
and larger than that of the Goosander, while the feathers
render a mistake impossible, for they are tipped with black,
or occasionally red-brown. There is no doubt that this
handsome duck is greatly on the increase. The nests
are generally placed in a hole in a sandbank, not far from
the sea, but at Wolverton, in Norfolk, I have found them
more than two miles from the shore. On this estate the
keeper informs me that the female Sheld-duck may often
be seen conducting her brood through the village in the
early morning, en route for the sea, and they are sometimes
noticed marching down the railway line to the same
destination. So numerous are they in this carefully
protected area, that whilst I was examining a nest
twenty-three adult birds were counted in the air at the
same time. On June 3rd this nest contained fifteen eggs
20 BRITISH BIRDS.
about a quarter incubated, and underneath were many
old egg-shells, showing that the hole had been occupied
the previous season. In confinement I have known the
‘* Burrow Duck ”’ to nest in a hole in a tree. (PI. [., Fig. 1.)
MatiLarD (Anas boscas).—Though this species is usually
an early breeder, nests may be found throughout the spring
and summer months, from March, or even February,
until well on into June. The eggs of this bird vary more
than those of any other British duck, from greenish-blue
they range through yellowish-cream colour to white.
The down is large, brown in colour, with light centres,
the points hardly lighter than the rest. The down might
be confused with that of the Pintail, although the latter
is smaller. The flank feathers found amongst the down
are, however, larger, more pointed, and very different in
pattern, as will be seen by reference to figures 2 (Mallard)
and figures 7 (Pintail) in Plate I.
GADWALL (A. strepera).—This bird is now well estab-
lished in certain parts of Norfolk and Suffolk. In the
Thetford district it is one of the commonest ducks in
winter, and a certain number remain to breed. ‘The nests
I have seen in the Eastern Counties and in Spain have
never been far from water; one was in a wood close to a
river, and another in a reed-bed at the edge of a large
lagoon. The eggs are buffish-white, with no tinge of
green ; the down is very dark, with small light centres,
and with distinct grey points. The feathers are small,
light in colour, with irregular darker markings in the
centre, but lighter towards the tips. It would be difficult
to confuse them with those of any other duck. (PI. L,
Fig. 3.)
SHOVELER (Spatula clypeata)—-This duck is probably
far more common than is generally supposed, owing to
the fact that numbers leave their breeding haunts after
the young are able to fly. In some counties where they
breed regularly I have never seen one in the shooting
season. The nest is often placed on dry ground, some
little distance from water, and they seem to show
IDENTIFICATION OF DUCKS’ EGGS. 21
partiality for rough, rushy meadows. The eggs are
distinctly greenish in colour, which at once separates them
from those of the Wigeon, though the down closely
resembles that of the latter, and except that it is slightly
darker (probably varying in different individuals) I can
find little difference. The feathers, however, are totally
different, and render confusion between these two species
impossible. The only British duck’s eggs which at all
approach the Shoveler’s are certain varieties of the
Pintail’s, but the Pintail’s down is larger and lighter,
and the Shoveler’s feathers (especially the large ones)
are quite distinct, as will be seen by reference to
Plate I., Figs. 4, 4. This species breeds fairly early,
half incubated eggs were found by me on May 8th.
Wigeon seldom nest until the latter part of that month.
Pintatu (Dafila acuta).—The fact of this bird breeding
~ on Loch Leven is now unfortunately common knowledge :
there is, or was, a considerable colony on one of the
islands. I once counted thirteen nests, and there were
probably more. A few also nest in a certain spot in
Orkney, and it is said to have bred in Ireland. Its
breeding range extends as far south as Andalusia, and I
found a nest there (from which the female was procured)
in May, 1902. ‘The eggs are generally described as green-
ish in colour, and this is, no doubt, usually the case, but
there is at least one other variety which is almost as
creamy-coloured as the egg of the Wigeon, and without
any trace of green. As far as I know, the shape, which is
oval, remains constant. The eggs might be confused with
those of the Long-tailed Duck, but that bird’s down
is much darker, while its eggs are smaller, and the feathers
are distinct, as will be seen by reference to the figures.
The Pintail’s nests observed in Scotland were placed
on dry ground, and one was in an exposed situation on
burnt grass. In Spain and Hungary I have found them
in damp places, one on a marsh quite surrounded by
water. It is an early breeder, and full nests may be seen
Pye May Sth. (Pl. I., Figs. 7, 7.)
22 BRITISH BIRDS.
TEAL (Nettion crecca).—There is no difficulty about the
identification of the eggs of this bird, as the only others
that approach their small size are those of the Garganey.
Teal’s eggs are, however, slightly smaller than those of
the Garganey, and they have a greenish tinge entirely
absent from the eggs of the latter species. The down of
the Teal is also darker than that of its congener, and has
no white tips. The feathers are of a light stone colour,
with broad dark patches extending almost to the tip of
the feather (Pl. I., Figs. 5, 5).
GARGANEY (Querquedula circia).—-In this case the down
alone is quite sufficient for identification ; it is smaller
than that of the Teal, and very distinctly white tipped.
The feathers are light grey, with dark central patches
which do not extend either to the tip or edges of the
feather (Pl. I., Figs. 6, 6). The eggs are creamy without
the green tinge. The Garganey is probably the rarest of °
the ducks which breed regularly in this country. It
nests in the Broad district, and according to Howard
Saunders* has been found breeding in Yorkshire, and
its eggs have recently been discovered in Kent. The
only nest that has come under my personal observation
was found on May 18th, in a field of rank grass not far
from one of the Broads. It contained seven fresh eggs.
Wicron (Mareca penelope).—Probably owing to pro-
tection, and also to the numbers of these birds that are
bred in semi-confinement and subsequently allowed their
liberty, this bird has largely increased its breeding range.
At one time confined to the North of Scotland, it has
recently been known to nest in Perthshire, Dumfriesshire,
and Yorkshire, whilst I have some evidence that eggs
have been laid in Norfolk, and very young birds have
been seen at Beaulieu, in Hants, during early August.
It has not yet been known to breed in Ireland, and the
statement to the contrary has been proved incorrect.
Eggs are seldom laid before the latter part of May. The
nest is often placed in heather some distance from water
* “Til, Man, Brit. Birds,” 2nd Ed., p. 435.
IDENTIFICATION OF DUCKS’ EGGS. 23
but frequently on an island. The eggs are cream-
coloured, the down is dark, with no particular charac-
teristic, but the feathers are unmistakable, being white
sometimes with grey centres, which spread to the top of
the web (PI. I., Figs. 8, 8). The down of the American
Wigeon is much darker, and the centres not so distinct.
Common PocHarp (Fuligula ferina)—The down: of
this bird is large and exceedingly soft to the touch; the
egos are of a dirty greenish colour, and might easily be
mistaken for those of the Scaup, or the Tufted Duck,
although they are usually larger than the former, and
considerably larger than the latter. Nests I have seen
in Scotland were placed in thick dead rushes on or close
to the edge of a loch, and they might almost have been
mistaken for Coots’ nests, for in two instances there was
not a particle of down present, although the eggs were
on the point of hatching.* In Spain we noticed a nest
in the middle of a swamp, thickly lined with down, which
was damp at the bottom. In the North, incubation com-
mences about the middle of May. The feathers found
in the nests are rather large and brownish in colour,
slightly streaked from the centre upwards, and often
tipped for a quarter of an inch with grey (PI. I., Figs. 9, 9).
EXPLANATION OF PuaTE I.
Figs. Feathers from Where When By whom
Nest of. taken. taken. taken.
1 Sheld-duck .. Norfolk .. 3.6.1903 .. H. Noble.
aie Mallard fw wberkshire 3. .Sb.a L901} 2, a
3 Gadwall see Noriole” v2, 2a: 1901. ... ts
4,4 Shoveler aa, NOrhollic -)-... 8.5.1897
550 Teal er eOrtoule!! \ 8.5.1897
6, 6 Garganey oe Orrolie Ns. Yr Lb ES99
via Pintail sy Scotland. 2.) 18tsck899
8, 8 Wigeon t= scotland...:. -26.5.1896 .. _
9, 9 Pochard ee” COLAING of. = “ae LOO os a
* Since the above was written, I have had particulars of seven more
nests placed in thick rushes, in which no down was present. I have
several times noticed that Mallards’ nests have no down when placed
in such positions. I should be very glad to know the experience of
other readers of BritisH Brrps on this point.
(To be continued.)
(ome 9
ON THE MORE IMPORTANT ADDITIONS TO OUR
KNOWLEDGE OF BRITISH BIRDS SINCE 1899.*
BY
H. F. WITHERBY anp N. F. TICHHURST.
PAnr 2
(Continued from Vol. T., page 350.)
FLAMINGO Phenicopterus roseus Pall. S. page 395.
[On November 22nd, 1902, a Flamingo was shot on the
Wash ; on November 5th, 1904, another was seen in Norfolk ;
and in August, 1906, three were shot in the same county. In
December, 1904, one was killed in Kent; but so many have
been turned out at Woburn with only cut wings (cf. Vol. I., p.
91),and probably at other places, that we cannot regard these
as genuine migrants.
We must here record our emphatic opinion that it is con-
trary to the interests of scientific ornithology to turn out birds
of species which visit us or may be likely to visit us as
genuine migrants. |
GREY LAG-GOOSE Anser cinereus Meyer. S. page 397.
ScotLanp.—A young bird still unable to fly was obtained
in the Tay area in the autumn of 1906, and the bird was
considered to have been bred in the district (T. G. Laidlaw, Ann.
Scot. Nat. Hist., 1906, p. 237). Mr. Harvie-Brown records a
decided increase in the numbers of this species in many parts
of Scotland, and a distinct expansion of range to certain new
haunts (Fauna N. W. Highlands and Skye, p. 221).
A bird received from Limerick November 23rd, 1901, has
been assigned by Mr. F. Coburn (cf. Bull. B.O.C., XII., p. 80,
and Zool., 1903, p. 46) to the supposed distinct eastern form
which was separated by Hodgson under the name of Anser
rubrirostris. Mons. 8. Alpheraky, who examined a very
* As was explained in the first instalment of these articles (vide
BritisH Birps, Vol. I., p. 52), we refer here only to those records and
observations which are additions to the Second Edition (1899) of
Saunders’ ‘ Illustrated Manual of British Birds.”’ It must also be
pointed out that nothing which has already appeared in any part of
this magazine is included in these articles, so that they must be read
in conjunction with the magazine so far as published, as well as with
Saunders’ ‘* Manual.”
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 25
large series of this goose, does not, however, admit the
validity of this bird even as a geographical form (cf. Geese
of Europe and Asia, p. 29), and Mr. Coburn’s arguments seem
to be set aside by the proofs of great variability in size and
colouring brought forward by M. Alpheraky.
WHITE-FRONTED GOOSE Anser albifrons (Scop.).
S. page 399.
There has been a great deal of discussion during the last
few years as to the validity of Anser gambeli of Hartlaub,
the American representative of the White-fronted Goose
(epee. HH. Gurney,.fb1s, 1902, p:- 269 e¢ seg.; F.“Coburn,
Zool., 1902, p. 337; H. W. Robinson, t.c., 1903, p. 268; J.
A. Harvie-Brown, t.c., p. 315, and 8. Alpheraky, Geese of
Europe, etc., p. 45, etc.). Mr. Coburn thinks, with some
former authors, that the bird is distinct, and that specimens
which he says he received from Ireland belong to it; M.
Alpheraky, on the other hand, unites the bird with A. albifrons.
It must be pointed out that specific characters founded on
specimens obtained outside the breeding area of the bird
are really of little value. The White-fronted Goose is
without question a variable species, and whether it can be
separated into geographical races or not, can only be
determined by a careful comparison of a large series of
specimens obtained within one breeding area, with a corre-
sponding series obtained in another breeding area.
LESSER WHITE-FRONTED GOOSE Anser erythropus (L.).
S. page 400 (also cf. B.B., Vol. I., p. 14).
NorroLtk.—An adult female was shot near King’s Lynn
on January 24th, 1900, and sent to Mr. F. Coburn (cf. F.
Bopucn, 200. a 100l wn aly, ¢ ull. BOWC., XI1., p. 15’;
J. H. Gurney, Jbis, 1902, p. 269, etc.).
Yorxs.—A male in the collection of the late Sir H.
Boynton was said to have been taken near York (T. H.
Nelson, B. of Yorks., p. 413).
BEAN-GOOSE Anser segetum (J. F.Gm.). 8S. page 401.
OvuTER HEBRIDES.—One was shot and two others were seen
in South Uist in March, 1903 (J. A. Harvie-Brown, Ann.
Scot. Nat. Hist., 1903, p. 119). The “ Manual” says that its
reported occurrence in the Outer Hebrides requires con-
firmation.
M. Alpheraky’s separation (op. cit.) of the Anser arvensis
of Brehm from the A. segetum of Gmelin is supported by a
considerable amount of evidence. The chief characters
lie in the bill, that of A. arvensis being “longer and com-
— 26 BRITISH BIRDS.
paratively broader at the point, and far more depressed
behind the nail of the upper mandible (than that of A.
segetum). At the same time the lower mandible in WM.
arvensis is less curved and comparatively less depressed in
the thickest part (looking at the shut bill from the side) than
in M. segetum. The nail is considerably shorter, but at the
same time also broader and more rounded, both longitudinally
and transversely.” The colours of the bills of the two birds
are also different, but they do not seem to form a safe guide
owing to their variability. We have quoted the above passage
at length because Mr. F. W. Frohawk affirms that this goose
is the usual form of the Bean-Goose to be found in this country,
and that the true A. segetum is rare (cf. Field, 1902, p. 605 ;
Zool., 1903, p. 41). Mr. Einar Lonnberg in discussing the
question is inclined to think that variability accounts for the
differences, and that there are not two distinct species (Zool.,
1903, p. 164).
Mr. Frohawk considers (Zool., 1903, p. 42, etc.) that the
bird shot at St. Abb’s Head on February 25th, 1896, and
described by Mr. F. Coburn at length in the “ Zoologist ”
(1902, pp. 441-448), as Anser paludosus of Strickland, is
referable to A. arvensis. Mr. Coburn laid stress on the great
length of the neck of the bird he described, but the specimen
being a stuffed one no reliance can be placed on this feature.
The distribution of A. arvensis and A. segetum is in-
completely known, but according to M. Alpheraky A. arvensis
is far more numerous than A. segetuwm, and the “ region of its
nidification is larger both in longitude and latitude.”
Another species of Bean-Goose, viz., the Anser neglectus
of Sushkin (cf. bis, 1897, p. 5) from Novaya Zemlia and
Kolguev, is suspected by M. Alpheraky (op. cit., p. 81), and
by Mr. Frohawk (Field, 1902, p. 1045) to occur in Great Britain.
Many diverse opinions have been expressed as to the specific
differences of these Geese and their occurrence in this country,
and it appears to us that before a definite decision can be
reached more observations and examination of larger material
must be made. |
These birds undoubtedly vary greatly individually both in
size and coloration; moreover, they are usually shot by
sportsmen rather than naturalists, and consequently it is
difficult to get together a good series with careful notes as to the
colouring of the soft parts, which has, perhaps unfortunately,
been used as a character for the separation of the species.
Thus a bird, which the editor declared to be a Pink-footed
Goose (Anser brachyrhyncus), was sent to the ‘“ Field’ from
Breconshire this year, and this specimen had yellow legs and
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 27
feet (cf. Field, 1908, p. 182, 410). On this point M. Alpheraky
(op. cit., p. 89) remarks that he can find but one record of such
an occurrence in the wild bird (Payne-Gallwey, Letters to
Young Shooters, 3rd Series, p. 69), although it has been recorded
that Pink-footed Geese bred in captivity sometimes have both
the bill and the feet yellow.
SNOW-GOOSE Chen hyperboreus (Pall.). S. page 405.
IRELAND.—A female in excellent plumage. was shot in
co. Longford on October 28th, 1903. It was in company
with another bird, also shot, but not preserved, which was
described as “dark in the plumage,” and may have been a
young bird of the same species (Williams and Son, Zool., 1903,
p. 459). Four were observed flying overhead within forty
yards at Foxford, co. Mayo, on December Ist, 1903 (G. F.
Knox, Irish Nat., 1904, p. 76, and R. Warren, Zool., 1904,
p- 32). On December 30th, 1906, Captain Kirkwood saw a
flock of fourteen (four white adults and ten greyish-coloured
birds) at Bartragh, co. Mayo (R. Warren, t.c., 1907, p. 72).
GREATER SNOW-GOOSE Chen nivalis Forster.
(cf. S. page 406.)
This form, which is only to be distinguished from the fore-
going species by its larger size, inhabits Arctic America,
whereas the smaller bird is apparently confined, as a breeding
species, to eastern Siberia and the western shores of Arctic
America (cf. Alpheraky, op. cit., p. 15). A specimen of this
bird was shot near Belmullet, co. Mayo (? date), and was
exhibited by Dr. R. B. Sharpe on behalf of Mr. R. J. Ussher
at the November, 1899 meeting of the Brit. Orn. Club (Bull.
BO 5, OX. KV.)
BRENT GOOSE Bernicla brenta (Pall.). S. page 411.
An adult female of the American Black Brent (B.
_ nigricans) is said by Mr. F. Coburn to have been shot by a
wildfowler, named Richardson, in the Wash “deeps”
(Norfolk), on January 15th, 1907, and sent to him (cf. J. H.
Gurney, Zool., 1908, pp. 121 and 123 and Plate). Mr. Coburn
informs Mr. Gurney that a male of the same species was shot
by the same wildfowler near Lynn and sent to him on
February 14th, 1902. If the occurrence of a bird new to
the British list is to be accepted as authentic, it is far more
satisfactory wherever possible that it should be examined
in the flesh by two or more ornithologists, and recorded at
the time, than that it should be recorded for the first time
months and even years after it was obtained.
(To be continued.)
AQUATIC WARBLER IN CORNWALL.
An Aquatic Warbler (Acrocephalus aquaticus) was killed at
the Eddystone Lighthouse, off Cornwall, on October 11th,
1907, and a wing sent for identification.
C. B. TickEHuRST.
WHITE WAGTAIL IN CORNWALL.
Ir may be worth while to record that a specimen of the White
Wagtail (Motacilla alba) was killed at the Eddystone Light,
off Cornwall, on October 11th, 1906, and a wing sent for
identification. C. B. TIcEHURST.
BLUE-HEADED WAGTAIL IN NOTTINGHAMSHIRE.
In August, or early in September, 1907, a specimen of the
Blue-headed Wagtail (Motacilla flava) was shot near
Nottingham. The bird was seen at Rose’s, the taxidermist,
of Nottingham, by Mr. J. Musters, who had it sent to me, as
he felt sure it was a Blue-headed Wagtail. Mr. G. Millais
and Mr. H. E. Dresser have also examined it and pronounced
it to be a specimen of M. flava. 1. Wane
[This bird was shown to Dr. C. B. Ticehurst and myself
by Mr. Dresser, and as it has been suggested that the bird must
have been bred near the place of its capture it is as well to
point out that the plumage of the bird affords no proof that
this was so. Had it been in the pipit-like juvenile plumage
of the species, it might have been well said that the bird had
been bred near by, for this plumage is retained but a very
short time after the young has left the nest. But the specimen
in question was already in its first winter plumage, and was
therefore perfectly capable of flying from the Continent, or
elsewhere.—H. F. W.]
AN ESCAPED NUTCRACKER.
I NoTICE in last month’s BritisH Brirps (Vol. IL. p. 388)
a note to the effect that a Nutcracker was shot “in Kent”
on December 29th, 1907. It would be interesting to know
in what part of Kent this bird met its death, inasmuch as a
Nutcracker escaped from my aviaries on December 26th,
1907, three days previous to the time when the bird recorded
was. shot. This house is about five miles from the Kentish
NO'TES. 29
border, so that it is not unlikely that the example was my
bird. It was in perfect plumage when it escaped. I believe
it wasa male. It was very tame, and would feed from hand.
G. M. BERESFORD-WEBB.
THE BLACK WOODPECKER IN ENGLAND.
Many are the records of the occurrence of this bird in England,
but it has been clearly shown that even the apparently best
authenticated instances are untenable. This is only what
might be expected of a bird which, although of strong flight,
is strictly an inhabitant of the pine forests ‘‘ from the Arctic
Circle to Spain,” and is a most unlikely species to wander
far from its natural habitat, while the localities in this country
which are suitable to its habits are very restricted. But, on the
other hand, some of the more recent records are so precise,
and the bird itself is so remarkable in appearance, that they
cannot be dismissed offhand. This particularly applies to
the numerous reports of its appearance on the borders of
Norfolk and Suffolk, in the neighbourhood of Thetford,
Brandon, and Euston, perhaps the most suitable locality
that could be found for it in East Anglia.
The Rev. E. T. Daubeny, in recording several instances
of the supposed occurrence of this bird in Euston Park,
Ixworth, and Brandon, in 1897, remarked that it was ‘‘ well-
known that Lord Lilford liberated some of these birds towards
the end of the last century,” but I could obtain no confir-
mation of this, and so the matter stood till the year 1903,
when, much to my surprise, my friend, Mr. W. H. Tuck,
then living at Tostock, now at Bury St. Edmunds, informed
me that a friend of his, whose name he was not at liberty to
mention, brought seven or eight young Great Black Wood-
peckers from Sweden in the year 1897. These were seen by
Mr. Tuck, who further stated that they were placed in an
aviary near Brandon for about two months, after which they
were allowed to regain their liberty. This fact will, doubtless,
account for the presence of the birds reported to have been
seen in that neighbourhood, and perhaps for others which
may have wandered further afield.
Mr. Tuck was requested not to mention this fact for a
specified period, which accounts for his silence till 1903, but
he quite agrees with the writer that it is most reprehensible
that birds or insects should be thus secretly introduced to
the disturbance of the British fauna.
THOS. SOUTHWELL.
50 BRITISH BIRDS.
SHORT-EARED OWL BREEDING IN
NOTTINGHAMSHIRE.
A GoopLy number of these very interesting birds came to
some young coverts at Rainworth in November last. There
are two newly-planted pieces, one forty-six acres, the other
twenty-seven. There were about eight birds in each, and we
Nest and eggs of Short-eared Owl found at
Rainworth, Notts., May Ist, 1908.
(Photographed by H. E. Forrest.)
saw them when shooting, and in February I saw four or five.
About the middle of March I again saw one in each wood,
and on April 21st one in the smaller covert. I now thought
they would nest, so on Saturday, May 2nd, I tied a hand-
NOTES. 51
kerchief on the end of a 20-ft. salmon rod and went to the planta-
tion. I started where the trees are thinly planted, and where
there is much white grass, and waving my flag over the plants I
walked down the side of the piece, and soon flushed a Short-
eared Owl, which flew into a big tree and watched me. When
I got near him he flew round, and settled in a big ash
near where I started to beat. I find the male is slimmer and
lighter in plumage than the female. I turned and took a piece
back, and when I turned again for a third beat he left the tree
and came circling round over my head, calling “ Keii, keil.”
When I had gone about twenty yards further another Owl rose
about three yards to my left, and on looking I found a nest
at the foot of a small Scotch fir with eight eggs upon a thickish
bed of dry grasses. The eggs were not in a cluster, but rather
scattered. The nest was nine inches each way and two-and-a-
half inches thick. I need hardly say that I was full of delight,
for I had never seen the nest and eggs of this bird before, and
they are the first ever found in this county. J. WHITAKER
EIDERS OFF SOUTH DEVON IN APRIL.
On April 22nd, off Bolt Head, and at the entrance of the
creek running past Salcombe up to Kingsbridge, South Devon,
I noticed a small flock of Eider Ducks (Somateria mollissima).
Their presence so far south at this time of year seems rather
remarkable. The explanation may be the extraordinary
weather we have just been experiencing, of which the birds
were the forerunners, as the snow followed next day. The
wind had been in the east and north-east, but changed that
day to north-west. Keay. Sree.
STOCK-DOVE NESTING ON BUILDINGS.
Wir reference to the Rev. F. L. Blathwayt’s note on the
nesting of the Stock-Dove (C. enas) on Lincoln Minster, it
may be of interest to record that during the latter part of
March, 1907, I frequently heard a Stock-Dove cooing in the
Close at Winchester; and on April 1st I watched a pair of
these birds flying about the Cathedral, and twice saw one of
them enter a hole in the masonry, high up on the Cathedral wall.
In my experience the Stock-Dove is a bird which has of
late years become commoner in many localities, and perhaps
it is developing that taste for “‘ town life’? which 1s now so
noticeable in the Wood-Pigeon. Teese
[We think it will be found that Stock-Doves frequently
nest on buildings.—EDs. |
32 BRITISH BIRDS.
SPOTTED CRAKE IN SUSSEX.
A Spotrep CRAKE (Porzana maruetta) was captured at the
Royal Sovereign Lightship on May 8th, 1906, and a wing sent
for identification.
C. B. TicEHURST.
KENTISH PLOVER IN CHESHIRE.
A sAnpy stretch of the shore of Marbury Mere, near North-
wich, Cheshire, is a favourite halting place of passing migratory
waders and of wanderers from the neighbouring Mersey
Estuary, and on many occasions I have seen there small
mixed parties of Dunlins and Ringed Plovers. On April 29th,
1908, I put up eight birds from the edge of the mere; six of
these were Dunlins in summer dress, and the other two, at
first sight, looked like small pale Ringed Plovers. There was,
however, something in the flight or appearance of the birds
which specially attracted my attention ; I was sure they were
strangers. After a short flight over the water the birds
returned to the bank, where they settled and allowed me to
approach to within a dozen yards. I then saw that the
Plovers lacked the complete pectoral band of A‘gialitis hiaticola
or Al. curonica, that they were lighter in colour, and were
distinctly smaller than the former, for I was able to compare
their size with that.of the Dunlins. The birds were, I con-
cluded, a male and female. The male had a short black band
above his white forehead, black lores and ear-coverts. and a
black patch in front of the wing below the white collar. In
the female these black regions, with the exception of the
lores, were a dark brown. The rest of the plumage was sandy-
grey on the upper part, the female being noticeably paler
than the male. The bill and legs of both were black, or so
dark that they appeared black even at close quarters and in
an excellent light. The black patches on the aural regions and
sides of the neck did not cover quite so large an area as is
represented in the figure in Yarrell’s ‘ British Birds” (4th
Edition, Vol. III., p. 267). In both birds the collar, forehead,
stripe above the eye, and underparts were white. In spite of
the fact that the Plovers were slightly smaller than the
Duniins, they stood a little higher on their legs. I watched
them for nearly three hours, making rough sketches of them
and noting down the details of plumage, and was perfectly
satisfied that they were Kentish Plovers (4g:alitis cantiana),
an addition to the Cheshire avifauna.
In the West of England this species has only hitherto been
recorded from Devon and Cornwall, but it has been met with
further north than Cheshire on the East Coast. The birds
NOTES. 33
were not noticed by the gamekeeper when he made his rounds.
on the 28th, but he saw them on the 30th. On May Ist and
2nd, when I visited the mere again, I could not find them, and
a large number of passing migrants of other species, which I
saw on April 29th—including many Common Sandpipers, five
Common Terns, two White Wagtails, many Yellow Wagtails,
and the six Dunlins—had also disappeared.
T. A. Cowarp.
PURPLE SANDPIPER IN THE CHANNEL ISLANDS.
Aw example of the Purple Sandpiper (7'ringa striata) struck
Hanois Light, Channel Islands, and a wing was sent for
identification on November 15th, 1906. This species, no
doubt, has been overlooked in these islands (whose orni-
thology is very incompletely known), and is not mentioned in
Smith’s “‘ Birds of the Channel Islands.”
C. B. TicEHurst.
REDSHANK BREEDING IN WARWICKSHIRE.
In the spring of last year a pair of Redshanks (T'otanus
calidris)—locally called ‘‘ Whistling Plovers’’—nested in a boggy
field in the district of Hampton-in-Arden. Four chicks were
hatched, one of which was by some means killed; the other
three left with their parents in the autumn.
This spring, about the beginning of March, three birds, a
cock and two hens, returned, and two nests were made near
the previous one. Judging by the pieces of eggshell lying
near the nest it would appear that in one case the four chicks
have been successfully hatched; if this is the case they
emerged about April 27th. It is doubtful whether the young
birds have survived the floods, not being yet of an age to fly.
One egg, which proved to be addled, was taken from the
second nest by the gamekeeper, and I think it very probable
that the others are infertile, since there appears to be only one
cock bird.
Last year Redshanks were recorded for the first time as
breeding in Warwickshire (vide B.B., Vol. I., pp. 158 and
191), Oxford, eighty miles away, being, so far as I know, the
nearest place where they had previously been seen.
A. G. Lien.
BLACK TERN IN CHESHIRE.
On April 29th, 1908, I watched a small party of Terns on
Marbury Mere, near Northwich, which consisted of five
34 BRITISH BIRDS.
Common and one adult male Black Tern (Hydrochelidon
nigra). They were, together with half a dozen or more
Black-headed Gulls, feeding on insects which were flying
above the surface of the mere. The Common Terns repeatedly
dived downwards towards the water but did not strike the
surface ; they swooped upwards before they reached the water,
evidently having captured their prey. The Black Tern flew
with more graceful sweeps and curves, never half closing its
wings and shooting downwards, and occasionally just touched
the water with its bill as it passed, apparently picking some-
thing from the surface. It repeatedly flew to and settled
upon a stump which projects above water; when it was
standing on the stump I could easily see the black head, and
almost black throat, breast and belly, strongly contrasted
with the white vent and slate back and wings. On May Ist,
when I next visited the mere, I could see neither the Common
nor the Black Tern, but on the 2nd I found that there were
two mature Black Terns, one, probably a female, being
noticeably lighter on the underparts.
Black Terns are occasional visitors to Cheshire on both
spring and autumn migration. In June, 1900, three birds
were seen by Messrs. F. S. Graves and P. Ralfe, and in
September, 1903, Mr. C. Oldham and I saw one, and in August,
1905, two birds on this mere.
T. A. CowaRD.
BIRDS IN NORFOLK IN 1907.
Mr. J. H. Gurney contributes to the “ Zoologist ” for April
his usual interesting annual report on the ornithology of
Norfolk. The most notable events to which reference has
not previously been made in our pages were as follow :—
DrseRT WHEATEAR (Saxicola deserti)—A male was shot
“near the sea”’ on October 3lst. This is only the second
recorded occurrence of this southern bird in England, although,
curiously enough, three have been obtained in Scotland.
FIRE-CRESTED WREN (Regulus ignicapillus)—One was
caught in the town of Yarmouth on October 31st.
YELLOW-BROWED WARBLER (Phylloscopus swperciliosus).—
One was shot at Cley on October 29th. This is its second
occurrence in Norfolk.
RED-BREASTED FLYCATCHER (Muscicapa parva).—One was
identified (not very satisfactorily) by Mr. E. C. Arnold on the
coast on September 11th, and another was identified by
another observer on October 29th.
ROSE-COLOURED STARLING (Pastor roseus)—One at
Toftrees in April.
NOTES. 35
Nutcracker (Nucifraga caryocatactes)—One was seen at
Gunton, near Lowestoft, on November 28th and 30th.
BaRn-ow. (Strix flammea).—Mr. Gurney has a good deal
to say about the luminous Barn-owls. There is, however,
no information as to what causes the luminosity which is the
point of real scientific interest, and curiously enough Mr.
Gurney thinks it would be a reprehensible deed to shoot one
of the birds, although this is obviously the best way of clearing
up the mystery. It would certainly do no harm, and might
advance scientific knowledge. The chief points of interest
in Mr. Gurney’s notes on the subject, are that the evidence that
Barn-owls occasionally exhibit luminosity is incontrovertible,
-and that the “light ” emitted is very much stronger than one
would imagine possible.
PureLe Heron (Ardea purpurea)—A young bird was
captured in the streets of Kirkley, a suburb of Lowestoft,
by a tram conductor on October 9th.
SpoonBILL (Platalea leucorodia).—The first seen on Breydon
was on April 2lst, and several were subsequently seen at
intervals in May and June, and the last on August 6th. Two
“‘ very”? young ones were noted on June 4th. None appear
to have been shot, we are glad to say.
A PLAN FOR MARKING BIRDS.
In volume I. of this Magazine several communications were
published on this subject. The advantage to students of
migration of knowing exactly where birds travel by observa-
tions on marked birds is obvious; but the difficulty of the
plan is that so few birds which are marked are ever found
again. If, however, great numbers were marked, no doubt
a large enough percentage would turn up to make the results
of value. Mr. C. Hawkins, of ‘“‘ Lyndhurst,” Woodside Road,
South Norwood, informs us that he has had made a number
of suitable aluminium rings of various sizes, stamped with a
registered address (‘‘ Avis, Wye, Kent”), and each bearing a
separate number for identification purposes. He is willing to
supply these rings to anyone who will undertake to place them
on birds, at the price of 5s. per gross, or 6d. per dozen. Mr.
Hawkins also undertakes to keep a register of the particulars
supplied by his correspondents concerning the birds marked,
and to publish the results from time to time. H.F.W
MARKED BIRDS.
On the same lines as Herr Chr. Mortensen, of Viborg (wde
British Birds, Vol. I., page 298), I have this year been
marking and liberating a number of birds of various species.
The mark employed is an aluminium ring on which is stamped
56 BRITISH BIRDS.
‘ Ticehurst, Tenterden,” and a register number, and the ring is.
put round one of the legs. Should any of my birds be met
with by any readers of BrrrisH Birps will they kindly return
the ring and the leg to me, stating the locality and the date
of capture ?
P C. B. TickuHurst,
Hurstbourne, Tenterden, Kent.
% * *
A TIMETABLE OF Birp Sone.—Mr. W. Gyngell, in a short
article (Nat., 1908, pp. 181-4) gives the result of his observations.
on the duration of the song of thirty-six species of birds in
the Scarborough district. The results are shown by means of
a table of curves, which, however convenient, does not give
sufficient detail to make the observations as valuable as they
might have been. Comparing this table with the Messrs.
Alexander’s observations lately published in this magazine
(cf. Vol. I., pp. 367-372) it is interesting to note that Mr.
Gyngell generally records a shorter song-period for resident
birds in Scarborough than Messrs. Alexander in Kent and
Sussex. Summer migrants appear to sing later in the north
than they do in the south. According to Mr. Gyngell, also
most of the resident birds make a considerable break in their
song in the autumn, whereas Messrs. Alexander record
occasional singing at this period.
SHORT-EARED OWLS IN THE IsLtE oF Man.—In connection
with Mr. W. J. Williams’ note (ante Vol. I., p. 358) with regard
to the influx of Short-eared Owls (Asio accipitrinus) into
Ireland in the autumn of 1907, it is interesting to note that the
bird was common in the Isle of Man in the same season, nearly
a dozen being put up in one turnip field (cf. P. G. Ralfe,
Nat., 1908, p. 169).
Honey-Buzzarp IN NortH Watzs.—Mr. C. D. Head
records that he has a male Pernis apivorus shot at Abergele
on October 15th, 1907 (Zool., 1908, p. 156).
BITTERNS IN HAmpsHirRE.—Mr. C. B. Corbin notes that
two or three examples of Botaurus stellaris frequented the
reed-beds of the Avon in the last winter (Zool., 1908, p. 157).
SUPPOSED SPOONBILL IN co. Limerick.—Mr. H. G. O.
Bridgeman writes that a local farmer near Foynes described
a bird which he had shot on the estuary of the Shannon in
the frost of 1905 as being “all white, and had legs long like
the crane (i.e., Heron), and had a bill what got bigger as it
got out, and flat like” (Irish Nat., 1908, p. 101). We can
but agree with Mr. Bridgeman that this sounds like a very
honest, if quaint, description of Platalea leucorodia.
B. _ MONTHLY. -ONE-SHILLING: NET
___ S26FIGIHOLBORNICNDON
wis
the Fee
| elk
Me ‘ff mele: te
Beas OF PALAEARCTIC BIRDS.
A Work on this subject, illustrated with BEAUTIFULLY |
. COLOURED PLATES, is now being issued.
- Write for Full Prospectus and a Part ‘ar inspection to
WILLIAMS & NORGATE,
1%, Henrietta Street, Covent Garden, London, W.C.
DALLMEYER’S
Naturalists’ Camera,
y 1907, MODEL,
Fo: Telephoto or Ordinary LENSES.
DALLMEYER’S
Lenses are used
—_ by the most
ie skilled Bird
Photographers.
The following are
spectally recommended :
THE STIGMATIC SERIES J. F/6 (Convertible.)
THE SERIES D PATENT PORTRAIT LENSES F 6.
(A Rapid Long Focus Leus at a Moderate Price.)
High or Moderate Power Telephoto Lenses (Original Make).
We are Specialists in Cameras and A lpparatus for. Photo- secon
CATALOGUES AND ADVICE FREE.
J. H. DALLMEYER, Limitep, bdENzIL RD.,
Showrooms: 25, NEWMAN ca W. NEASDEN. AAHOUK, NW.
WATKINS: & DONCASTER, —
- Waturalists,
And Manufacturers of CABINETS and APPARATUS for Enbaotse gy, Birds? Ege |
and Skins, and. all Branches of Natural History.
@ LARGE STOCK OF INSECTS, and BIRDS’ EGGS and SKINS. i
Speciality: :—Obiects for Nature Study, ‘Drawing Classes, &c, :
we api MARMASSE, &e., ‘PRESERVED and MOUNTED by FIRST-CLASS WORKMEN ne
TRUE TO NATUR
All Books and Publications. on Natural . History supplied.
36, STRAND, LONDON, W.C. (Five Doors from ane Gros.) Vee.
Scand (102 pp-) post free.
4 OMe A" see My py ee
he
Ud
Ti
fe Poa”
ve
ae
ny . * nN
>
By ae y
fl r
PRA
ie
at
>
Cae
‘. a
i
.
ak Sing
.
i]
a ee Le |
~~ @ "4
BRITISH BIRDS, Vol. II., Pl. 2.
TypicAL FEATHERS FROM Ducks’ NESTs.
Nat. size.
(Reproduced direct from the feathers.) (For explanation see p. 41.)
RED-THROATED DIVER: “She waddled to the Nest.”
(From one of Mr. Bahr’s Photographs.)
To Messrs. WILHERBY & CO., 326, High Holborn, London,
Or
Mie tr tual Os Cae Phir fe Wl) Pe RR ek
BOOKSELLER,
Pleaseusendwime ee i eo (EO Pe creas. of “HE
HOME-LIFE OF SOME MARSH - BIRDS,” for which
Meicloceree ee re
THE HOME-LIFE OF SOME MARSH-BIRDS.
Profusely illustrated. Price 2s. 6d. net.
SPECIAL PHOTOGRAPHIC NUMBER OF “BRITISH BIRDS.”
THE HOME-LIFE
MARSH-=-BIRDS
PHOTOGRAPHED” AND: DESCRIBED
BY
EMMA L. TURNER, F.LS.,
AND
P. H. BAHR, B.A., M.B.O.U.
THIRTY-TWO FULL PAGE PLATES
FINELY REPRODUCED” FROM FIRSI-CEASS Linz
PHOTOGRAPHS, FORMING “A. SERIES OF PICTURES
OF THE..MOST. INTIMATE INCIDENTS “IN: hie
HOME-EIFE, OF* SOME" OF- THE. SHIEST OF BiRDe:
SIXTY-FOUR PAGES OF LETTERPRESS.
DESCRIPTIVE OF THE POINTS OF INTEREST
ILLUSTRATED IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS.
MANY TEXT ILLUSTRATIONS
FROM: MR:-BAHIR’S;+ CLEVER: ‘SKETCHES:
DEMY 8vo. ART LINEN COVERS. 2s. 6d. NET.
(CLOTH BOARDS, 3s. NET.)
NATURE says: ‘They have set themselves the task of portraying
Marsh-Birds in positions and attitudes which will render the pictures of real
service to the scientific ornithologist; and we venture to think that the
verdict of their readers will be a pronouncement of unqualified success in
this respect. The book does not, however, depend entirely on_ its
illustrations. . . . the reader will find much of interest in ‘the brightly
written biographies which accompany the text.”
LONDON :
WITHERBY G&G CO., 326, HIGH HOLBORN.
DRITDSABIRDS
EDITED BY .H. F. WITHERBY, F.Z.S., M.B.O.U.
ASSISTED BY W. P. PYCRAFT, A.LS., M.B.0.U.
CoNTENTS OF NUMBER 2, Vou. II. Jury 1, 1908.
On the Identification of Ducks’ Eggs, by Heatley sky
M.B.0.U. (Plate IT.), (continwed trom page 23
Some Early British Ornithologists and their Works, by
W. H. Mullens, M.a., Lu.M., M.B.o.U. II.—Richard
Carew ; Bs “ns , a
On the More Important Additions to our Beings of
British Birds since 1899, by H. F. Witherby and N. F.
Ticehurst. Part XI. (continwed from page 27) ..
Notes :—The Nest and Nestlings of the Bearded Tit (W. P.
Pycraft). Nuthatches Breeding at Llandudno (H. E.
Forrest). Golden Oriole in Shropshire (H. E. Forrest).
Woodchat in Cheshire (J. M. St. John Yates). Hoopoe in
Shropshire (H. E. Forrest). Short-eared Owl Breeding
in Pembrokeshire (H. E. Forrest). Supposed Wild
Swans on Coll (Heatley Noble). Inland Nesting of the
Sheld-Duck (T. Southwell). Want of Down in Mallard’s
Nests (M. Winzar Compton). Common Crane in Anglesey
(Alfred Newstead, Curator). Common Terns on the
Holyhead Skerries (Heatley Noble). Abnormal Eggs
of Black-Headed Gull (Herbert Trevelyan). Incubation
Periods in Sea-Birds (H. F. W.), etc. : :
Review :—The British Warblers—A rae with Problems
of their Lives
ON THE IDENTIFICATION OF DUCKS’
BY
HEATLEY NOBLE, M.B.0.v.
(Prat IT.)
(Continued from page 23.)
Page
37
42
58
67
EGGS.
TurrteD Duck (f’. cristata).—This species breeds in
June, and is very numerous in certain localities.
On one
ErratumM.—lIn the first instalment of this article (ante p. 19, line 10
from the bottom) Wolferton was printed Wolverton.
38 BRITISH BIRDS.
island in a northern loch I once counted nearly one
hundred nests, containing from seven to fourteen eggs
apiece, the average number being nine (June 12th).
Incubation lasts twenty-three days, as proved by eggs
placed under a hen. The eggs are smaller than those of
the Pochard, or Scaup, and slightly lighter in colour ;
the down is dark and compact, without conspicuously
light centres; the feathers are greyish-white, and very
small (Plate II., Figs. 11, 11).
Scaup-Duck (fF. marila).—On June 14th, 1899, Captain
Sandeman and I were fortunate enough to find the
first authentic nest of this species in Scotland.* I believe
another nest was found last year in the Hebrides by a
competent ornithologist, who, I fancy, was satisfied with
the identification. We have often been blamed for not
procuring the female from our nest, but this course seemed
to me quite unnecessary, for we had watched the birds
(two females and a male) for days, and saw the bird both
going to and coming from the nest as we lay in the reeds
within a few yards. I had kept these birds in confine-
ment, and they were so well-known to me that mistaken
identification was impossible. The eggs are much the
same colour as those of the Pochard, but slightly smaller.
Those with which they are most likely to be confused are
Tufted Ducks, but they are much larger; the down is
lighter, with more conspicuous light centres, while the
feathers are quite distinct, being larger, sometimes
slightly speckled, especially towards the tip, and of
different markings (Plate II., Figs. 10, 10).
GOLDEN-EYE (Clangula glaucion).—This bird has not
yet been proved to breed in the British Isles, but there is
some evidence of its having done so, and on August Ist,
1887, I shot a young bird in Scotland some considerable
distance inland. The eggs when first laid are of a beautiful
green, which unfortunately soon fades. For the loan of
down and feathers I am indebted to Mr. P. C. Musters,
who took the nest from a holein a pine tree in Norway,
* See “Ann. Scot. Nat. Hist.,’’ 1899, p. 215.
IDENTIFICATION OF DUCKS’ EGGS. 59
on June 19th, 1897. The down is white, as are also the
feathers, and should the nest be discovered in Great
Britain it could not be mistaken for that of any European
duck, with the exception of Barrow’s Golden-eye C.
islandica, which breeds in Iceland and Greenland, and
has not yet been recorded as visiting this country
(Plate IT., Fig. 14).
LonG-TAILED Duck (Harelda glacialis).—-This is another
species which has never been known to nest in this country,
though it may have done so. The eggs are green, rather
smaller than those of the Pintail, and more pointed.
The down is dense, small, and “ Kider-like ” in texture,
quite unlike that of D. acuta, which is the only duck with
which it could be confused. It will also be seen that the
feathers are very unlike (Plate II., Figs. 12, 12).
ErpER Duck (Somateria mollissima).—These eggs
could not be mistaken for those of any other British duck.
Always green, but varying in shade, there is an
* Eiderish ’”’ look about them which would prevent the
possibility of error. Howard Saunders gives the number
of eggs as from five to eight, but the latter number must
be very rare, at least in our islands. I have examined
numerous nests in’ Scotland, the Farne Islands, and
Orkney, and only once noticed six eggs, far more often
the female was sitting on four than five. The well-known
down needs no description, but it may be mentioned here
that the downs of the three “ British ”’ Eiders are very
distinct. That of the Common Eider is light; of the
King-Eider darker; and of Steller’s Eider darker still.
The eggs also graduate in size, those of the Common
Hider being the largest, the King-Eider smaller, and
Steller’s Hider smallest (Plate IT., Figs. 13, 13).
Common Scoter (Gdemia nigra).—This bird breeds
quite commonly in Caithness and Sutherland, more rarely
in Ross and Cromarty, and probably Inverness. It is,
however, very local in distribution. It has nested in
Ireland, and Mr. Ussher kindly sent me an egg, down,
and young-in-down, for identification. The nests are
40 BRITISH BIRDS.
difficult to find, being often well concealed in rank heather,
and at some considerable distance from the loch side,
while they are not infrequently on islands. A clutch taken
in Sutherland on June 17th consisted of seven eggs,
advanced in incubation. They were buffish-white in
colour, the down almost black, and the feathers with no
distinguishing marks, but the nest and eggs were un-
mistakable (Plate II., Figs. 15, 15).
VELVET ScoTER (. fusca).—-I spent six weeks in Nor-
way in an unsuccessful endeavour to discover the nest of
this species. Although plenty of birds were seen, it is
doubtful if they were breeding in that particular year,
and I was driven away by snow on July llth. There
appears to be some evidence that a pair or two have bred
in the Highlands of Scotland, but at present proof is
wanting. The eggs are larger than those of the Common
Scoter, and rather lighter in colour. The down is also
lighter and larger. I.am indebted to Mr. Witherby for
the loan of a beautiful nest taken in Lapland, and to Mr.
Ogilvie-Grant for the feathers depicted (Plate I1.,
Figs. 16, 16).
GOOSANDER (Mergus merganser).—In certain parts of
Scotland, especially the Garve district, this bird is not
uncommon in the breeding season. Nesting much earlier
than the Red-breasted Merganser, the Goosander has its
clutch of from nine to twelve, or even fifteen, eggs,
generally complete by the first week in May, and on the
28th of that month I have found birds hatched a few
days. Any kind of hole seems to suit the nesting require-
ments of this duck. In the experience of the writer,
nests have been found in holes in trees, clefts in rocks,
and under peat hags. The eggs are creamy-white; the
down is pearl-grey, and the feathers are white, with a
tinge of yellow. The only other duck’s eggs like those of
this species are the Sheld-duck’s, but the feathers in two
nests are so different as to at once preclude the possibility
of mistake (Plate II., Figs. 17, 17).
RED-BREASTED MERGANSER (1. serrator)—Much more
IDENTIFICATION OF DUCKS’ EGGS. Al
widely distributed than the last species, this bird breeds
commonly on many rivers and lochs in Scotland, also on
the sea coast in Ireland it is common, and in Orkney and
the Hebrides numerous. The nest is well concealed, often
in high heather, sometimes in dense reeds on an island,
often in a rabbit-hole or cleft in a peat bank, but seldom
far from water. The eggs, which number up to fifteen,
and are not laid before the end of May, are stone-coloured,
with just a greenish tinge, the down is dark grey (much
darker than that of the Goosander), and the feathers
(very much smaller than those of M. merganser) are quite
white (Plate II., Fig. 18).
EXPLANATION OF PLATE MII.
Figs. Feathers from Where When By whom
Nest of. taken. taken. taken.
10, 10 .. Scaup-Duck . Scotland .. 14.6.1899 .. H. Noble.
11,11 .. Tufted Duck . Scotland .. 12.6.1898 . Ae
12, 12 .. Long-tailed
Duck . Norway .. 4.6.1899 .. Ramperg.
13, 13 .. Eider Duck . Scotland-.. 2.6.1896 .. H. Noble.
14 . Golden-Eye .. Norway .. 19.6.1897 .. P. C. Musters.
15,15 .. CommonScoter.. Scotland .. 17.6.1899 .. H. Noble.
16,16 .. Velvet Scoter .. Petchora,.. 6.7.1875 .. H.Seebohmand
Siberia. J. A. Harvie-
Brown.
17, 17 .. Goosander . Scotland .. 25.4.1903 .. H. Noble.
18 . Merganser . Scotland .. 6.6.1896 .. na
( 42)
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS
AND THEIR WORKS.
BY
WwW. H. MULLENS, ™.a., 11.m., M:B.0.0-
IIl.—RICHARD CAREW
(1555—1620).
WILLIAM CAMDEN (1551-1623), the celebrated author
of “ Britannia”? (London, 1586, 1 vol., 8vo), at the
conclusion of the ‘‘ Account of Cornwall,’ contained in
that work, wrote as follows :—
“But these Matters will be laid open more distinctly
and fully, by Richard Carew of Antonie, a Person no less
eminent for his honourable Ancestors, than his own
Virtue and Learning, who is writing a Description of this
Country,* not in little but at large.”
Carew’s work duly appeared in 1602, and was entitled
“The Survey of Cornwall.”
It was dedicated by its author to Sir Walter Raleigh,
and in the dedication Carew describes his book as “ This
mine ill-husbanded Survey, long since begun, a great
while discontinued, lately reviewed, and now hastily
finished . . . And in his preface to the reader he
informs us that “‘ When [I first composed this Treatise,
not minding that it should be published in Print, I caused
onely certaine written copies to bee given to some of my
friends, and put Prosopopeia into the bookes mouth. But
since that time, master Camden’s often mentioning this
work, and my friends perswasions, have caused my
determination to alter ie
* The original Latin word is “‘ regionis,”’ the translation is from James
Woodman’s edition of Carew’s ‘‘ Survey of Cornwall.”
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 43
Through this fortunate alteration of his original purpose
we are indebted to Richard Carew for a book of peculiar
and lasting interest. Not only is the “Survey of Cornwall”’
one of the earliest works to deal with the birds of a
particular county, but it contains a far fuller and more
important description of them than do many of the so-
called County Natural Histories, afterwards published
in this country.
Carew’s observations on Cornish birds have frequently
been quoted by later writers, and as the first edition of
the “Survey of Cornwall” is an uncommon book, we
propose to give them at length.*
Our author begins his account of the birds on fol. 24 of
the ‘“‘ Survey ”’ as follows :—
‘‘ Among living things on the land, after beastes follow
Birds, who seeke harbour on the earth at night, though
the ayre bee the greatest place of their haunt by day.
‘“Of tame Birds, Cornwall hath Doves, Geese, Ducks,
Peacockes, Ginney Duckes, China geese, Barbarie hennes,
and such like.
“Of wild, Quaile, Raile, Partridge, Fesant, Plover,
Snyte, Wood-dove, Heath cocke,t Powte, etc.
‘“ But amongst all the rest, the Inhabitants are most
beholden to the Woodcockes, who (when the season of
the yeare affordeth) flocke to them in great aboundance.
They arrive first on the North-coast, where almost everie
hedge serveth for a Roade, and everie plashoote for
Springles to take them. From whence as the moyst
places which supplie them food beginne to freeze up, they
draw towards those in the South Coast, which are kept
more open by the Summers neerer neighbourhood : and
when the Summers heate (with the same effect from a
contrairie cause) drieth up those plashes, nature and
necessitie guide their returne to the Northern wetter
soyle again.
* Cf. Harting’s edition of Rodd’s “ Birds of Cornwall,’’ Introduction,
pp. Xiv.-xviii.
+ z.e., the Black Grouse and its ‘‘ powte ”’ or young.
44 BRITISH BIRDS.
‘“Of Hawkes there are Marlions, Sparhawkes, Hobbies,
and somewhere Lannards.* As for the Sparhawke,
though shee serve to flie little above sixe weekes in the
yeere, and that only at the Partridge, where the Faulkner
and Spanels must also now and then spare her extra-
ordinarie assistance; yet both Cornish and Devonshire
men employ so much travaile in seeking, watching,
taking, manning, nusling, dieting, curing, bathing, carry-
ing and mewing them, as it must needs proceede from a
greater folly, that they cannot discerne their folly therein.
To which you may add, their busie, dangerous, discourteous
yea, and sometimes despiteful stealing one from another
of the Egges and young ones, who if they were allowed
to aire naturally and quietly, there would bee store
sufficient to kill not onéely the Partridges but even all the
good-huswives Chickens in a Countrie.
‘Of singing Birds they have Lynnets, Goldfinches,
Ruddockes,t Canarie birds, Black-birds, Thrushes, and
divers other; but of Nightingals, few, or none at all,
whether through some natural antipathie betweene them
and the soyle (as Plinie writeth that Crete fostereth not
any Owles, nor Rhodes Eagles, nor Larius Lacus in Italy
Storkes) or rather for that the Country is generally bare
of Covert and woods, which they affect, I leave to be
discussed by others.
“Not long sithence, there came a flock of Birds into
Cornwall, about Harvest Season, in bignesse not much
exceeding a Sparrow, which made a foule spoyle of the
Apples. Their bils were thwarted crossewise at the end,
and with these they would cut an Apple in two, at one
* It seems doubtful whether the Lanner, Falco lanarius (cf. Newton,
Dict. of Birds, p. 503) ever bred in this country. Turner makes no
mention of it doing so, and though Merrett (Pinax Rerum London, 1666,
1 vol., 12mo), gives it in his list of British birds as ‘“ Lanarius, the
Lanar’”’ and states that it bred in various places in England, he was
most probably referring to some other species of Falcon. Willughby
also does not include it among the birds found in this country, on the
other hand Symon Latham in his “ Falconry,” 1618, distinctly informs
us that it did breed in England. (Book II., p. 112).
+ 7.e., Robins.
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 45
snap, eating onely the kernels. It was taken at first for
a forboden token, and much admired, but, soone after,
notice grew, that Glocestershire, and other apple Countries,
have them an over-familiar harme.
‘““In the West parts of Cornwall, during the Winter
season, Swallowes are founde sitting in old deepe Tynne-
workes, and holes of the sea cliffes: but touching their
lurking places, Olaus Magnus* maketh a farre stranger
report. For he saith, that.in the North parts of the
world, as Summer weareth out, they clap mouth to
mouth, wing to wing and legge in legge, and so after
a sweete singing, fall downe into certaine great lakes or
pooles among the Canes, from whence at the next Spring
they receive a new resurrection: and hee addeth for
proof hereof, that the Fishermen, who makes holes in the
Ice, to dip up such fish with their nets, as resort thither
for breathing, doe sometimes light on these Swallowes,
congealed in clods, of a slymie substance, and that
carrying them home to their Stoves, the warmth restoreth
them to life and flight: this I have seen confirmed also
by the relation of a Venetian Ambassadour, employed
in Poland, and heard avowed by travaylers in those
parts: where-through I am induced to give it a place
of probabilitie in my mind, and of report in this
treatise.”
Dealing next in order with fresh and salt water and
the fish thereof, Carew comes in due course to the
‘‘ sea-foule,’’ of which he writes as follows :—
‘* Besides these flooting [7.e. floating] burgesses of the
Ocean, there are also certaine flying Citizens of the ayre,
which prescribe for a corrodiet therein; of whom some
serve for food to us, and some but to feed themselves.
_ Amongst the first sort, we reckon the Dip-chicke (so named
of his diving and littlenesse), Coots, Sanderlings, Sea-Larkes,
* Olaus Magnus, Archbishop of Upsala, whose ‘‘ Historia de Gentibus
Septentrionalibus ’’ (Romae, 1555, 1 Vol., folio) Carew here quotes.
+ Corrodie—an allowance, or right of sustenance. M. L.—Corrodium
46 BRITISH BIRDS.
Oxen and Kine,* Seapies,f Puffins, Pewets,{ Meawes,
Murres,$ Creysers, Curlewes, Teal, Widgeon, Burranets,||
Shags, Ducke, and Mallard, Gull, Wild-goose, Heron,
Crane, and Barnacle. These content not the stomacke,
all with a like savorinesse, but some carry a rancke
taste, and require a former mortification: and some are
good to be eaten while they are young, but nothing
tooth-some, as they grow elder. The Guls, Pewets, and
most of the residue, breed in little desert Islands, border-
ing on both Coastes, laying their Egges on the grasse,
without making any nests, from whence the owner of
the land causeth the young ones to be fetched about
Whitsontide, for the first broode, and some weekes after
for the second. Some one, but not everie such Rock may
yeeld yeere-ly towards thirtie dozen of Guls. They are
kept tame and fed fat, but none of the sea kind will breed
out of their naturall place: yet at Caryhayes, Master
Trevanion’s house, which bordereth on the Cliffe, an old
gull did (with an extraordinarie Charitie) accustome, for
divers yeares together, to come and feede the young ones
(though perhaps none of his alliance) in the Court where
they were kept. It is held that the Barnacle breedeth
under water on such ships sides, as have been verie long
at Sea, hanging there by the Bill, untill his full growth
dismisse him to be a perfect fowle : and for proofs hereof,
many little things like birds, are ordinarily found in such
* Oxen-and-kine was, according to Swainson (Provincial Names of
British Birds, p. 195), the name given to the Ruff and Reeve at the
end of the sixteenth century. In the present: case, as Carew is here
dealing with Sea-fowl, it probably means the “ Oxbird”’ or Dunlin
(cf. Harting’s edition of Rodd’s Birds of Cornwall, p. 17).
+ Oyster-catcher.
t+ The Pewit Gull, Larus ridibundus (cf., Plot’s Natural History of
Staffordshire, Oxford, 1686, p. 231). Willughby calls it the Pewit
or Black-cap.
§ Murre, the Cornish name of the Common Guillemot, also the
Razorbill (cf., Swainson, p. 218).
|| Probably the Shelldrake. The Shelldrake is called Burgander or
Bergander (7.e., Burrow Gander) by Turner. Cf. also Charleton,
Onomasticon Zoicon, London, 1668, 1 vol., folio, p. 98. ‘The
Bergander or Burrow Duck.’ Willughby says the ‘ Shelldrake or
Borough Duck. . . . it is called Burrow-duck from building in Coney,
Burrows ”’ (The Ornithology, p i 28),
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 47
places, but I cannot heare any man speake of having seen
-them ripe. The Puffyn hatcheth in holes of the Cliffe,
whose young ones are thence ferretted out, being ex-
ceeding fat, kept salted, and reputed for fish, as comming
neerest thereto in their taste. The Burranet hath like
breeding, and, after her young ones are hatched, shee
leadeth them sometimes over-land, the space of a mile
or better, into the haven, where such as have leasure to
take their pastime, chace them one by one with a boate,
and stones, to often diving, untill, through wearinesse,
they are taken up at the boates side by hand, carried home,
and kept tame with the Ducks : the Egges of divers of
these Foules are good to be eaten.
“ Sea-fowle not eatable are Ganets, Ospray (Plynyes
Halizetos).*
“Amongst which Jacke-Daw (the second slaunder of our
Countrie) shall passe for companie, as frequenting their
haunt, though not their diet: I meane not the common Daw,
but one peculiar to Cornwall, and there-through termed
a Cornish Chough : his bill is sharpe, long, and red, his
legs of the same colour, his feathers blacke, his conditions,
when he is kept tame, ungratious, in filching, and hiding
of money, and such short ends, and somewhat dangerous
in carrying stickes of fire.”
The full title of the book is as follows :—
“The / Survey of / Cornwall / written by Richard
Carew / of Antonie, Esquire. / London / Printed
by S. S. for John Jaggard, and are to bee sold /
neere Temple-barre, at the signe of the Hand /
and Starre. 1602.”
1 vol. £. ¢. 4to.
Collation pp. 10 unnumbered + fol. 160 + pp. 6.
* Of. “The Ornithology’? of Francis Willughby (London, 1678, 1
Vol., folio). In the account of the Bald-Buzzard, p. 70, occurs the
following: ‘‘ At Pensans in Cornwal we saw one that was shot, having
a Mullet in its claw: for it preys upon fish, which seems very strange
and wonderful, sith it is neither whole-footed nor provided with long
legs or neck.”
Joshua Childrey, in his “ Britannia Baconia”? (London, 1661,
1 vol., 12mo) in his article on Cornwall observes (p. 20) ‘‘ There are
also Sprayes here, the same fowle that Pliny calls Haliaetos, but it is
not eatable.”’
THE
SVRVEY OF
—“g-/ CORNWALL. Hy
Written by Richard Carew
of Antonie, E/quire.
LONDON
Printed by S, S. for Iohn Jaggard, and are to bee fold
acere Temple-barre, at the figne of the Hand
andStarre. 1 6 © 2.
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS., © 49
This, the first edition, which is rare, is described by
John Nicholson in his “* Bibliotheca Topographica
Britannica’ as “an exact and excellent survey.” A
facsimile of the title page is given opposite.
This edition was followed by another in 1723, entitled :—
“The / Survey / of Cornwall / and / an Epistle
concerning the / Excellencies of the / English
Tongue. / Now first published from _ the
Manuscript. / By Richard Carew, of Antonie,
Esq.; / with / The Life of the Author, / By
Ee Ce | eq. 5°)’ London,. / Printed for
Samuel Chapman, at the Angel in Pallmall; /
Daniel Browne jun. at the Black Swan without
Temple- / Bar; and James Woodman, at
Cambden’s-Head in Bowstreet / Covent-Garden
MDCCXXITI.”
1 Vol. f. c. 4to. 7
Collation pp. xx. + pp. 8 unnumbered + fol. 159 + pp.
8, ‘table of contents,’ + pp. 14. The dedication is signed
by James Woodman.
This edition was reprinted in 1769.
And in 1811 appeared that of Thomas Tonkin. 1 vol. 4to.
Richard Carew was born at East Antonie “In the
Eastern Parts of Cornwall, within some Miles of
Plymouth,” in the year 1555 (cf. Wood Athen. Oxon.,
Vol. I.). He was the son of Thomas Carew, and Elizabeth
Edgecomb, daughter of Sir Richard Edgecomb, of Mount-
Edgecomb in Devon.
In 1566 at the very early age of eleven, Carew “ became
a Gentleman Commoner of Christ Church ’’ Oxford, but
“had his chamber in Broadgate’s Hall.’’ While at Oxford,
Carew (according to Dr. Fuller in his History of the Worthies
of England, p. 203) “ being but fourteen years old, and
yet three years standing, he was call’d out to dispute
eatempore, before the Earls of Leicester and Warwick,
with the matchless Sir Philip Sidney.” *
* Sir Philip Sidney was born in 1554 and was then, therefore, fifteen
years old.
50 BRITISH BIRDS.
After leaving Oxford, Carew seems to have proceeded
to the Middle Temple, and according to Wood, was three
years later “sent with his Uncle (Sir George Carew,
as it seems) in his embassage unto the King of Poland ;
whom when he came to Dantzick, he found that he had
been newly gone from thence into Sweden, whither also
he went after him.” Richard Carew mentions his uncle,
‘““Master George Carew,” in his Survey (fol. 61), and
refers to the embassy to Poland, but says nothing about
accompanying his relative.
Carew, in due course, appears to have settled down at
his ancestral seat of Antonie, and to have studied
agriculture and husbandry to such purpose that “ he was
accounted among his Neighbours the greatest Husband
and most excellent Manager of Bees in Cornwall.” He
became High Sheriff of his County in 1586, and in 1599
was “‘ Colonel of a Regiment consisting of five companies,
or 500 Men, armed with 170 Pikes, 300 Musquets and 30
Calivers,* appointed for Causam Bay.”’
In 1589, Carew was elected a member of the College of
Antiquities, a Society which at that time was about to
apply to Queen Elizabeth for a Royal Charter—* But as
fair as the Hopes of this famous College appeared in its
Bloom, they were soon blighted by the Death of that
ever-memorable Princess”? and all “their applications
to his successor, proved vain and unsuccessful. But
what else could be expected from a Man . . . whose
Genius and taste were as low and mean as his Soul and
Inclinations ! ”
Richard Carew died on the 6th day of November, 1620,
in the 63rd year of his age, and lies buried in the Church
of East Antonie among his ancestors.
* 7.e., a light hand-gun fired without a rest.
( ol)
ON THE MORE IMPORTANT ADDITIONS TO OUR
KNOWLEDGE OF BRITISH BIRDS SINCE 1899.
BY
H. F. WITHERBY anp N. F. TICEHURST.
Para XE,
(Continued from page 27.)
COMMON SHELD-DUCK Tadorna cornuta (S.G.Gm.).
S. page 419.
NorroLtk.—A satisfactory increase is recorded in the Lynn
and Hunstanton districts (J. H. Gurney, Zool., 1903, p. 130).
Kent.—Breeds numerously in the marshes adjoining
the tidal waters in the north of the county. For interesting
details vide T. Hepburn, ‘ Zool.,” 1907, pp. 54 et seq.
RUDDY SHELD-DUCK Tadorna casarca (L.).
S. page 421.
NorFroitk.—An adult female, ‘* believed to have been shot
in Norfolk,’ was sent to Mr. Cole for preservation August
18th, 1898 (A. Patterson, Zool., 1900, p. 530).
Two (possibly turned out) seen on Foulmere by Mr. W.
Clarke, April 13th, 1906 (J. H. Gurney, t.c., 1907, p. 126).
GADWALL Anas strepera L. 8S. page 425.
Hants.—In 1904 a number of pinioned birds were turned
out on Beaulieu Manor (Heatley Noble, Zool., 1904, p. 193).
Is supposed to have nested at Beaulieu (J. E. Kelsall and
P. W. Munn, B. of Hants., p. 226).
CoRNWALL.—Has been procured at least six times, the
two latest were a male near Bodmin, in January, 1905, and a
female near Land’s End, January 10th, 1907 (J. Clark, Zool.,
1907, p. 285).
Scitty IstEs.—One was shot at Tresco on January lst,
1900, the first recorded (J. Clark and F. R. Rodd, t.c., 1906,
p- 304).
SHROPSHIRE.—A drake was seen in Hawkstone Park on
December 9th, 1906 (C. Oldham, f.c., 1907, p. 32).
MerRIoNETH.—A male was shot at Ynysfor, on December
52 BRITISH BIRDS.
30th, 1890, and a female at the same place on December 14th,
1901 (G. H. Caton Haigh, t.c., 1902, p. 112); while another
was shot at the same place on December 20th, 1904 (H. E.
Forrest, Vert. Fauna N. Wales, p. 277).
Norts.—One was shot at Besthorpe in November, 1906,
and a pair at Clumber in December, 1906, and a few have
been seen in recent years at Annesley (J. Whitaker, B. of
Notts., p. 196).
YORKSHIRE.—Three were obtained at the Teesmouth in
October, 1896 (T. H. Nelson, B. of Yorks., p. 451).
PEEBLESSHIRE.—A pair were reported to have nested near
Broughton, and to have reared their brood in 1906 (H. B.
Marshall, Field, 28, vir., 06).
In spite of its increase in Norfolk, the Gadwall seems,
according to all recent accounts, to be still a rather rare
visitor to the rest of Great Britain, and especially so in the
west. It does not appear to have established itself as a
breeding species in any county but Norfolk and Suffolk.
IRELAND.—Several were “hot on Lough Key, co. Roscom-
mon, in the winters of 1905-7 and 1907-8 (H. G. O. Bridgeman,
Trish Nat., 1908, p. 101).
The Gadwall is a scarce and irregular winter visitor to
Ireland, and has not apparently been recorded from Ros-
common previously, although it has occurred from time to
time in most counties.
SHOVELER Spatula clypeata (L.). S. page 427.
LINCOLNSHIRE.—In August, 1902, Mr. Caton Haigh saw a
few Shovelers at Tetney, and was told that at least one pair
had bred there; on August 14th, 1903, he saw two broods
at the same place (G. H. Caton Haigh, Zool., 1903, p. 368 ;
1904, p. 297).
NorFroLtk.—Nearly thirty pairs were breeding at Hoveton
in 1906 (J. H.« Gumey, 7¢.c;; 1907, p.- 127).
SuFFOLK.—Breeds regularly in the north-east of the county
(F. C. R. Jourdain, in Witt.).
Essex.—Mr. H. M. Wallis has found the nest on the coast,
and Mr. Miller Christy has recorded it as breeding (Vict. Hist.
Essex).
Herts.—Nests regularly at Tring (O. V. Aplin, t.c., 1902,
p. 68). Near Tring two or three pairs have bred regularly for
at least ten or twelve years (Rothschild and Hartert, Vict.
Hist. Bucks., 1., p. 145 (1905)).
STAFFORDSHIRE.—Now known to breed regularly in several
places in the Cannock district (F. C. R. Jourdain in litt.).
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 53
BEDFORDSHIRE.—Now known to breed regularly in several
places (id.).
Kent.—A brood of nine young, with the parents, seen in
Romney Marsh May 19th, 1900 (N.F.T., Zool., 1900, p. 279).
During the last seven years the birds in this locality have
increased, and nests have been found every year (N.F.T.).
In the north of the county it breeds numerously in the
marshes of the Thames Estuary, cf. Mr. Hepburn’s article
(Zool., 1907, pp. 52 et seq.).
HampsuHire.—Increasing as a breeding species, especially
in the valley of the Avon (J. E. Kelsall and P. W. Munn,
B. of Hants., p. 232).
Devon.—A pair reared their young at Braunton, in 1904
(J. Cummings, Zool., 1905, p. 112). A pair said to have bred
in North Devon for the past three years (B. F. Cummings,
me., 1907, p. 22).
SHROPSHIRE.—At least one pair nested and reared a brood
on the marshes at Minsterley in 1907 (H. E. Forrest, Caradoc
F. Club Rep., 1908, p. 30).
The Rev. F. C. R. Jourdain informs us that he knows that
it has bred also in the following counties not mentioned in
the ‘Manual,’ Dorset, SUSSEX, CAMBRIDGESHIRE (locally
common) and LANCASHIRE.
NorrH Wates.—It breeds regularly in some numbers in
Anglesey, and a pair nested in 1896 at Llyn Mynyddlod, in
Merioneth (H. E. Forrest, Vert. Fauna N. Wales, p. 278).
ScoTLaAND.—It nests not infrequently on the borders of
Northumberland, especially on the Scottish side (A. Chapman,
Bird-Life Borders, p. 97). Hast Lothian.—Although nesting,
is by no means a common bird (H. D. Simpson, Zool.,
1904, p. 459). Tay Basin.—Still increasing. Becoming very
generally distributed in suitable situations on the shallower
and reedier lochs of the east (J. A. Harvie-Brown, Fauna
Tay Basin, etc., p. 233). Sutherland.—Colonel Duthie found
a nest, and saw three or four birds on Loch Canna, Assynt,
in the west of the county (id., Fauna N. W. Highlands, etc.,
p- 231). Outer Hebrides.—Bred on South Uist (first time
_ recorded) in 1903 (zd. op. cit., p. 237). Nest found, and several
pairs seen in 1906 (N. B. Kinnear, Ann. S.N.H., 1907, p. 82),
and in 1907 “still on the increase,’ and two nests found
fee. Bahr, é.c.,;: 1907, p. 213).
IRELAND.—Oo. Antrim.—Two nests taken in May, 1901,
near Belfast, were first recorded as being those of the Wigeon,
but were afterwards proved by Mr. Heatley Noble to be
Shovelers’ (R. Patterson, Irish Nat., 1901, p. 147, and 1903,
p. 275). Co. Mayo.—Although scarce a few years ago they
54 BRITISH BIRDS
now breed on many of the lakes in North Mayo (R. Warren,
t.c., 1902, p. 247). Co. Donegal.—Has increased very much °
as a breeding species on Lough Swilly of late years (D. C.
Campbell, t.c., 1905, p. 263).
The Shoveler is evidently increasing, and extending its
range, and ornithologists would do well to take most careful
notes from year to year of the numbers of these birds
wherever they are nesting, as well as of Pochards, Tufted
Ducks, and other increasing species.
Sequence of Plumages.—Mr. J. L. Bonhote states that the
drakes have an intermediate plumage between that’ of the
‘eclipse’? and the full breeding plumage. This plumage
succeeds the “ eclipse’? in September, and the full plumage
is attained gradually during the course of the winter (J. L.
Bonhote, Bull. B.O.C., XVI., p. 64).
PINTAIL Dafila acuta (L.). S. page 429.
ScotLanp.—Berwick.—A nest with seven eggs (five hatched
out) was found near Hawick on May 17th, 1901 (Ann. S._N.Z.,
1902, p. 1383). Selkirk.—A female was flushed from her eggs
and watched in the southern part of the county on May 15th,
1901 (W. Renton, ¢.c., 1902, p. 120). Argyll—Four or five
were seen (? breeding) on June 4th, 1907, on Loch Tulla
(C. H. Alston, t.c., 1908, p. 119). Inverness.—In the British
Museum there is a clutch of seven eggs from ‘ Cromlit,
Knockie,”’ from the late Edw. Hargitt (F. C. R. Jourdain, in
litt.). Outer Hebrides.—Broods were seen in S. Uist in 1902,
and the species appears to be increasing as a winter bird in
Benbecula (J. A. Harvie-Brown, t.c., 1902, pp. 209-210).
Shetland.—A pair with young birds identified June 4th, 1905,
at Dunrossness (T. Henderson, Jun., f.c., 1906, p. 53; cf.
Harvie-Brown, t.c., 1907, 115).
TEAL WNettion crecca (L.). 8S. page 431.
OvuteR Hesripes.—Now breeds plentifully in the Uvzsts
and Benbecula (N. B. Kinnear and P. H. Bahr, Ann. S.N.Z.,
1907, pp. 218 and 820; and J. A. Harvie-Brown, i.c., 1902,
p. 209). The first actual record of its nesting on Lewis was
made in 1903 (2d., t.c., 1903, p. 245).
GARGANEY Querquedula circia (L.). 8S. page 435.
DurHAM.—Bred at the Teesmouth between 1880-7 (T. H.
Nelson, B. of Yorks, p. 457).
NorFoLk.—Nests estimated at two in 1898 in the Broad
District (J. H. Gurney, Zool., 1899, p. 115).
Kent.—Two nests found in Romney Marsh in May, 1900
‘ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 55
(N.F.T., ¢.c.; 1900, p. 279). Seems to be on the increase in
Romney Marsh, five pairs seen in 1907 at one locality (N.F.T.).
In the North Kent marshes Mr. T. Hepburn believes that it
nests, and has seen birds in April and May, but has not as yet
been able to confirm the fact (é.c., 1907, p. 48).
Hants.—It appears to have nested near Fareham in
1897 (J. E. Kelsall and P. W. Munn, B. of Hants., p. 228).
Scitty Istes.—Has been obtained seven times (J. Clark
and F. R. Rodd, Zool., 1906, p. 304).
ANGLESEY.—An adult male seen April 15th, 1905 (T. A.
Coward, t.c., 1905, p. 386).
SHETLAND.—A male was shot on April 14th, 1907 (T. E.
Saxby, Ann. S.N.H., 1907, p. 182).
WIGEON Mareca penelope (L.). S. page 437.
CUMBERLAND.—A nest with ten eggs reported to have been
found in 1903 (Field, 25, vir., and 1, vimt., 03).
Yorxks.—In addition to the nest found near Scarborough
in 1897, a pair bred at Malham Tarn in 1901, and in a semi-
domesticated state it breeds regularly at Thirkleby Park,
and at Scampston (T. H. Nelson, B. of Yorks., p. 460).
[NorFroLtk.—A deserted nest, said to have been a Wigeon’s
from the appearance of the eggs and down, was found in’
Norfolk in 1904 (J. Whitaker, Field, 18, v1., 04). We believe
that this certainly was not the nest of a Widgeon but that of
a Gadwall. |
Merionetu.—A pair nested on Llyn Mynyddlod in 1898.
Two pairs were seen at the same place April 19-30th, 1902,
and a young bird was shot there September 30th, 1904 (H. E.
Forrest, Vert. Fauna N. Wales, p. 283).
Scottanp.—Sutherland.—There is evidence of Wigeon
breeding on Loch Assynt in 1901 and 1902, and several pairs
were seen around Loch Urigil in 1903. A nest was found at
the latter in May, 1903, by Mr. Blathwayt, and is the first
authentic record of the Wigeon breeding to the west of the
Divide (J. A. Harvie-Brown, Fauna N.W. Highlands, etc.,
pp. 234, 235.) Roxburgh.—There is a certain amount of
evidence that Wigeon have bred near Yetholm from time to
time, but absolute proof is still wanting (A. Chapman, Bird-Life
Borders, p. 90). Outer Hebrides.—A pair seen several times in
June, 1906, but no nest found (N. B. Kinnear, Ann. S.N.H.,
1907, p. 82).
For some interesting notes as to the first records of the
breeding of the Wigeon in Scotland wide ‘‘ Ann. Scott. Nat.
Hist.,”’ 1902, p. 200, footnotes.
56 BRITISH BIRDS.
AMERICAN WIGEON Mareca americana (J. F. Gm.).
S. page 439.
An adult male was shot on Benbecula, Outer Hebrides,
on January 3rd, 1907, by Mr. E. M. Corbett (R. Bowdler
Sharpe, Bull. B.O.C., XIX., p. 57, cf. also Ann. S.N.H., 1907,
p. 116). This is the first authentic record of the occurrence
of this rare wanderer in Scotland. The bird is now in the
British Museum (Natural History).
RED-CRESTED POCHARD WNetta rufina (Pall.).
S. page 441.
YORKSHIRE.—One shot near Redcar, January 20th, 1900
(T. H. Nelson, Zool., 1900, p. 483). Another was shot about
February 10th, 1900, at Coatham, near Redcar (J. W. Fawcett,
Nat., 1900, p. 304).
Norro.tk.—Thirteen appeared on Breydon on September
4th, 1906, and nine of them were killed by a punt gunner
named Youngs. A tenth was picked up dead soon after in
the neighbouring marshes (A. H. Patterson, t.c., 1906, p. 394).
Another pair was shot at Hickling by Alfred Nudd, on Sep-
tember 8th (N. H. Smith, Field, 15, 1x., 06); while two
others were seen there on the 12th and escaped. They all
appear to have been adult birds, the drakes being still in eclipse
(J. H. Gurney, Zool., 1907, p. 134).
SuFrFoLK.—An adult pair shot at Thorpe Mere by the sea,
January 16th, 1904, by Mr. F. G. Garrett (2d., t.c., 1905, p. 90;
Bull. B.O.C., XIV., p. 62).
COMMON POCHARD Fuligula ferina (L.). S. page 443.
DuruHam.—A pair nested successfully in 1903 in the south-
east of the county, and attempted to nest again in 1904
(C. E. Milburn, Nat., 1904, p. 216).
Norrotk.—Mr. J. H. Gurney describes a female bird in
his possession, which was caught in Saham Mere in 1904,
and which he believes to be a hybrid with a Tufted Duck
(Zool., 1905, p. 268).
EssEx.—Has bred since 1886 (M. Christy, Vict. Hist. Essex).
Kent.—Mr. T. Hepburn found a nest containing seven
eggs, which he believes to have been Pochard’s, in the
marshes of north Kent, on April 19th, 1904 (¢.c., 1907, p. 48).
In the same locality it has since been found nesting with
certainty by Mr. Walpole Bond (in litt.).
Herts.—Breeds in increasing numbers at Tring.
BERKSHIRE.—At least six pairs nested in Windsor Park in
1907 (Graham W. Kerr, Zool., 1908, p. 139).
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 57
BEDFORDSHIRE.—Recorded as breeding (Vict. Hist. Beds.,
Wol. T., p: 126).
STAFFORDSHIRE.—Recorded definitely as breeding at
Gailey Pools in 1890 (Rep. N. Staffs. F. Club, 1905-6, p. 49).
Hants.—Is said by Hart to have nested in the New Forest
district since 1880, but has not been found nesting elsewhere
in the county (J. E. Kelsall and P. W. Munn, B. of Hants.,
p. 238).
ScotrisH BorpERS.—Twenty to thirty pairs nesting on
Hoselaw Loch in 1906. Whitrigg Bog, near St. Boswells,
Roxburgh and Hule Moss, on Greenlaw Moor, Berwickshire,
are now the only other localities on the borders where the
Pochard nests (A. Chapman, bird-Life Borders, p. 90).
OvuTER HEBRIDES.—Now far from uncommon (J. A. Harvie-
Brown, Ann. S.N.H., 1902, p. 211).
FERRUGINOUS DUCK Fuligula nyroca (Gild.).
S. page 445.
YORKSHIRE.—In the spring of 1903 four birds frequented
a sheet of water near Ackworth, and two, an adult male and
a female, were shot. The others, which were a pair, remained
there till the end of the year (W. B. Arundel, Zool., 1904,
p. 33).
NorFotk.—In April, 1903, twenty birds in two flocks,
frequented Rollesby and Hickling Broads. One _ flock
was composed entirely of adult males (J. H. Gurney, t.c.,
1904, p. 207). An immature bird was shot on January lst,
1906, on the Broads (M. C. H. Bird, t.c., 1906, p. 75). - Four
were seen on the Broads on April 10th, 1906, the day follow-
ing a N.E. gale (J. H. Gurney, f.c., 1907, p. 126). <A flock of
five was “reported”? on Hickling on December 27th, 1907
(id., t:¢., 1908; p. 135).
SuFFOLK.—One was shot at Culford on January 23rd,
1906, after a N.E. gale, and a second a few days later (id.,
Pee, 1907, p. 123).
SurRREY.—One in the Charterhouse collection is stated to
have been shot at Bramley (J. A. Bucknill, B. of Surrey,
p. 239).
CoRNWALL.—An immature male was killed on the beach
near Mylor, on March 11th, 1905, during very stormy weather.
The first record for the county. (J. Clark, Zool., 1907, p. 285.)
MontTcoMERY.—One was shot out of a party of seven at
Machynlleth by Mr. Percy Lewis, on April 2nd, 1906 (H. E.
Forrest, Vert. Fauna N. Wales, p. 286).
(To be continued.)
THE NEST AND NESTLINGS OF THE BEARDED TIT.
WHILE spending the Whitsun holidays on Hickling Broad
I had the good fortune to inspect two nests of the Bearded
Tit (Panurus biarmicus) and the following notes thereon may
prove of interest.
Each nest contained six nestlings just showing the first
traces of feathers, but no trace whatever of nestling down
—a point worth mentioning—further, they had passed the
“blind ” stage, the eyes being fully opened.
But what I was specially interested in was the coloration
and form of the markings of the inside of the mouth, which
differed from any description hitherto given, including my own
(cjante; Vol. ¥., po lau)
fae
Briefly, these markings take the form of four rows of
pearly-white, conical, peg-like projections, suggesting the.
palatal teeth of reptiles, two on either side of the middle line.
These tooth-like bodies, which are well shown in the accom-
panying photograph, were not of uniform size, and were set
in a background of black surrounded by a rich carnelian red,
the whole being framed in by the lemon-yellow gape-wattles,
NOTES. 59
which are not very strongly developed. The tongue is black
with a white tip, and a pair of white spurs at its base.
The first nest was quite normal in position, but the second
had, unfortunately, been placed actually on the ground, and
some five or six yards from the water. I first visited this
nest on June 8th and photographed the young in situ. The
photograph proving unsatisfactory, I returned on the 11th
for the purpose of making another attempt but found, to my
dismay, that a tragedy had happened. In the nest lay two
dead and bleeding young, while around the nest lay the
remaining four, all more or less mangled. The burying
beetles had commenced their work of interment, and at first
I wondered whether they had gathered in force and worked
the mischief. Realizing how highly improbable this was, I
removed the nest and, tearing away the grass on which it
had rested, discovered, beneath, the runs of a mole! About
these there could be no mistake, and we must assume,
therefore, that a mole had worked the mischief—a not
unprecedented event.
The nest I pulled to pieces on the spot—it was already
greatly damaged—and found that while it was typical in its
general conformation—leaves of the reed forming its outside,
the flower-heads thereof its linmg—it differed from all the
published descriptions I have so far met with in having a
number of feathers interwoven with the lining. I detected
feathers of Swan, Mallard, Water-Hen and Snipe.
W.. Pl Pyerarr:
NUTHATCHES BREEDING AT LLANDUDNO.
In view of the fact that up to the time of publishing my
“Fauna of North Wales” no authentic occurrence of the
Nuthatch (Sitta cesia) on the north coast of Wales was known,
it is interesting to note that a pair took up quarters in
Gloddaeth Woods, Llandudno, early in the present year,
and bred there later on. They were first observed by Mr.
R. W. Jones, who showed me the nest-hole on May 10th. I
heard the bird calling close by at the time.
H. E. Forrest.
GOLDEN ORIOLE IN SHROPSHIRE.
Mr. J. A. Juckss (Acock’s Green, Birmingham) reports seeing
a male Golden Oriole (Oriolus galbula) at Cleobury-Mortimer,
Shropshire, on April 26th (Birmingham Daily Mail, May 2nd,
1908). The Golden Oriole has occurred previously on two
or three occasions in Shropshire.
H. E. Forrest
60 BRITISH BIRDS.
WOODCHAT IN CHESHIRE.
On May 2nd, 1908, I saw two Woodchats (Lanius pomeranus),
I think male and female, on some furze bushes by the side of
the river Dane, about two miles above Congleton. The
reddish-brown head and conspicuous black and white plumage
of the male, coupled with the unmistakable Shrike beak,
struck me at once. The female was not so bright in colour.
I watched them for about fifteen minutes. The birds were
remarkably tame, and allowed me to approach within about
three yards of them. They seemed to be hunting for some-
thing among the spines of the furze. Eventually they flew
away. I have been to the spot on several occasions since,
but have not seen them again. The Woodchat has not been
observed in Cheshire on any previous occasion, but it has
twice been recorded from Lancashire.
J. M. St. JoHN YATES.
[Mr. T. A. Coward kindly substantiates the above record,
which is rather wanting in detail. Mr. Yates described the
birds fully to Mr. Coward, and we are quite satisfied that the
identification was correct. Mr. Yates is, Mr. Coward writes,
an enthusiastic bird observer, and knows the Red-backed
Shrike well. We have only to add that it is a pity that those
who observe rare wanderers and do not obtain them, do not
always write down on the spot as full a description as possible
of what they see.—EDs.]
HOOPOE IN SHROPSHIRE.
Mr. G. H. Pappock saw a Hoopoe (Upupa epops) in his
garden in Wellington, Salop, on the morning of May 29th,
and watched it for some time. It was set upon by a number
of Sparrows, which compelled it to fly away. Over a dozen
previous occurrences in Shropshire have been recorded.
H. E. Forrest.
SHORT-EARED OWL BREEDING IN
PEMBROKESHIRE.
I am indebted to Lieut. W. M. Congreve for news of the
finding of two nests of the Short-eared Owl (Asio accipitrinus)
in the neighbourhood of Pembroke Dock. The first was
discovered early in May, and was remarkable for the
elongated shape of the eggs. The second—a fortnight later—
contained eggs of the ordinary rounded type. The Rev.
NOTES. 61
Murray A. Mathew, in his book on the “ Birds of Pembroke-
shire,” refers to this bird as having bred on Skomer Island,
but appears not to have seen it there himself.
H. E. Forrest,
SUPPOSED WILD SWANS ON COLL.
THE following appeared in one of the Scottish papers, and
was forwarded to me.
‘Some of your readers will be interested in learning that a
pair of Wild Swans are this year nesting on a small loch near
the Parish Church in the Island of Coll. . . . ete.—W. A. G.”
I visited the Island of Coll on June 14th and saw the birds
in question ; they are not ‘‘ Wild Swans,” but Mute Swans (C.
olor). Five eggs were laid; two hatched, and the cygnets are
now with the parent birds. These particulars are sent in
case the mistake may be quoted at some future date.
HeatLey NOoBLeE.
INLAND NESTING OF THE SHELD-DUCK.
Mr. Heattey Nose in his interesting and useful paper
“On the Identification of Ducks’ Eggs” (ante, p. 19), calls
attention to two facts regarding the nesting of the Sheld-
Duck (Zadorna cornuta) in Norfolk which are of especial
interest. First, as to the greatly increased number of Sheld-
Ducks nesting with us, and, secondly, as to this bird fre-
quenting localities distant from the sea-shore, where alone we
have been accustomed to look for it at that time.
As to the increased numbers to be found nesting. We have
the evidence of Sir Thomas Browne that in his time (1668)
they were ‘‘not so rare as Turn[fer|* makes them comon in
Norfolk so abounding in vast and spatious warrens,” but,
like all other breeding birds, constant persecution reduced
its numbers in pre-protection times to a very sad remnant,
so that Stevenson writing about the year 1890 could only
record that, at that time, only a few pairs nested in the
sandhills on the north-west coast of the county. I can well
remember how in the summer of 1853 I was surprised to find
fragments of the egg-shells of this bird outside a burrow on
the Wells ‘‘ meals”? from which a brood had evidently been
hatched. Since protection has been extended to them their
numbers (as well as those of other species of Ducks) nesting
in Norfolk have increased amazingly and they are to be
found nesting in most suitable localities on the north and
west coasts.
* See “ Turner on Birds,’’ Evans’ Edit., p. 25.
62 BRITISH BIRDS.
The fact of their occasionally nesting at a considerable
distance from the sea-shore in former times did not escape
Stevenson’s notice, and he enlarges upon the subject in the
‘Birds of Norfolk” (Vol. III., p. 124), quoting Sir Thomas
Browne (as above), who states that they bred ‘‘in cunny
burrows about Norrold [Northwold] and other places”? some
eighteen or twenty miles from the sea. Stevenson also men-
tions that these birds had been known to nest in the heaths
at Dersingham and Sandringham, and it is interesting to
have Mr. Noble’s statement that they still frequent the same
neighbourhood for that purpose.
I have also been told, but I forget my authority, that the
Sheld-Duck nests on the Twig Moor, the Lincolnshire breeding
place of the Black-headed Gull. Can any of your corre-
spondents confirm this? It is worthy of remark that seven
of the species of Duck mentioned by Mr. Noble nest regularly
in Norfolk and one other (the Wigeon) is suspected of having
done so. T. SouTHWELL.
WANT OF DOWN IN MALLARDS’ NESTS.
Mr. Herattey Nose, in his interesting paper on the
‘Identification of Ducks’ Eggs,” asks the experience of
readers as to the amount of down in Mallards’ nests when
placed among thick rushes. I have observed two such nests
this spring, in one of which very little down was present,
while in the other only a few bits could be found by lifting
the eggs. One or two pairs nest every season in the same
place, a large disused gravel-pit, overgrown with bulrushes,
etc., and I always notice the same deficiency of down in these
nests.
With reference to Sheld-Ducks, on June 9th, this year, I
had, in this corner of Yorkshire (Hull district), a very similar
experience to Mr. Noble’s in Norfolk, viz., the sight of
twenty-two adult birds on the wing together.
M. WINzZAR COMPTON.
COMMON CRANE IN ANGLESEY.
A FEMALE Common Crane (Grus communis) was shot at
midnight on the 16th May, 1908, at Rhosneigr, Anglesey, by
the gamekeeper, on the estate of Colonel Thomas J. Long.
The plumage and feet of the bird are in most perfect condition,
and there is no indication that it had been in captivity.
Judging from the colour of the plumage it had not quite
reached maturity; but the ovaries were well developed, the
largest being about the size of a pea, and the red wattles on
NOTES. 63
the head were well marked. The measurements were as
follows :—Length, 44 inches; wing, 21 inches; tarsus, 8?
inches; weight, 11 pounds. The stomach was completely
filled with equal parts of pebbles and grit, and the remains
of the large tipulid larva (T7pula oleracea), of which fifty-four
examples were almost perfect, the largest measuring 14 inches
in length. Besides these, there were also the remains of four
Elaterid beetles (Agriotes sp.) and a freshly caught larva
belonging to the same group, but not, apparently, of the same
genus; there were also fragments of the dung beetles Aphodius
fimetarius and Geotrupes sp., and two oat glumes. Colonel
T. J. Long has very generously presented the specimen to the
Grosvenor Museum, Chester, where it is highly valued, and
forms an extremely interesting addition to the local collections
preserved in this institution.
ALFRED NEwsTEAD (Curator).
Cranes of various kinds are often kept in semi-captivity with cut,
and not pinioned, wings (cf. ante, Vol. I., p. 91), and frequently escape
when they grow new quill feathers, and then show no signs of captivity.
We have, therefore, asked Mr. Newstead to make a more critical
examination of the contents of the stomach of the bird above recorded,
in the hopes that this might prove its origin. Unfortunately, the
contents of the stomach do not greatly help us.
Mr. Robert Newstead kindly writes :—‘‘ As to the insects taken
from the stomach, I can only confirm what my brother has stated in
his letter to you. I have given these a most criticial examination, and
find that they are all indigenous species; and the majority had been
captured by the bird within a few hours of its death. With the ex-
ception of the larva of the Agrotid beetle, they are all common and
widely distributed species ; and are as abundant in Anglesey as in any
other part of the British Isles.”
Mr. J. Lomas (lecturer in Geology at the University, Liverpool) has
very kindly examined the stones, and finds them to represent the
following :—
SPECIMENS.
Quartzite and vein quartz white .. ae .. 485
Flints os; 02 gt .. 40
Quartzite and sandstone ve ts an Tay ou
Chalcedony -p! oa a ite alle
Pottery and porcelain ee se x ee
Slates 3 wd ey ee eee
Granites, letiblendic oe. “ot <¥ ame 6
Mica schist .. 1
Micaceous sandstone 1
606
Mr. Lomas adds: ‘“ It would seem that the Crane selects the stones
on account of their brightness. In a general assemblage of stones they
are all such as would strike the eye at once, 516 of the stones being
white in colour. It is difficult, if not impossible, to state where the
stones come from. The quartzite are universally distributed. The
only distinctive ones are the granites, and they certainly do not come
from Anglesey. The flints are brown, and resemble southern types.
64. BRITISH BIRDS.
They are not Irish. The slates and mica schist might come from
Anglesey, the Isle of Man, or Scotland. We must not forget that the
island is covered with glacial deposits which contain erratics from many
localities, and that makes it increasingly difficult to trace their origin.
I am sorry the examination of the stones does not lead to definite results
from your point of view.’’—Ebs.
COMMON TERNS ON THE HOLYHEAD SKERRIES.
Ir is generally supposed that these birds do not breed on the
Skerries, and that the rocks are occupied during the breeding
season exclusively by Arctic Terns and a few Roseate Terns
(cf. H. E. Forrest, Vert. Fauna N. Wales, p. 375). That this
is not the case has recently been proved by her Grace the
Duchess of Bedford, who has been good enough to forward
me a Common Tern (Sterna fluviatilis), which killed itself
against the telephone wire whilst she was visiting the colony.
Her Grace added, “‘ several were seen.”’
HEATLEY NOBLE.
ABNORMAL EGGS OF BLACK-HEADED GULL.
On May 15th, 1908, I took a nest, with its clutch of three
eggs, of the Black-headed Gull (Larus ridibundus) from a
lake island in Ireland where this Gull was nesting in
numbers. It is well known that the ground colour and
markings of their eggs vary to a considerable extent, these
are of a pale greenish blue—the two largest almost without
markings, the smallest with a few brownish blotches. The
contents of the eggs were fresh and, as far as I could judge,
normal in appearance, as are also the shells, with the exception
of the smallest, which appears to be rough and of a some-
what friable nature at its pointed end. They measure
1-4 x 1.1 m.,° 1.6 12m. 1.7% 1.2 in. . Pattensieer
‘Aquatic Birds” gives the average measurements of the
eggs of the Black-headed Gull as 2.2 x 1.5 in. I believe
complete clutches of abnormally small eggs of this species are
not common.
HERBERT TREVELYAN.
INCUBATION-PERIODS IN SEA-BIRDS.
Durine the spring and summer of 1907 Mr. F. G. Paynter
made some experiments as to the duration of the incubation-
period of certain sea-birds at the Farne Islands by placing
the eggs in a hot-air incubator. Mr. Paynter describes his
experiments in “Country Life”? (March 21st, 1908, p. 409),
and we give below the results arrived at, and add for the sake
NOTES. 65
of comparison the observations recorded by Mr. William
Evans ([bis, 1891, pp. 52-93, 1892, pp. 55-58) :—
Emer Duck (Somateria mollissima).—Thirty-one days.
In Mr. W. Evans’ experiments an egg hatched in an incubator
on the twenty-seventh day, and under a hen on the twenty-
eighth day.
RineeD PLoverR (4igialitis hiaticula)—Twenty-five days.
Mr. Evans’ hatched in an incubator on the twenty-second,
twenty-third, and twenty-fifth days.
OysTER-CATCHER (Haematopus _ ostralegus)—Twenty-one
days. Mr. Evans gives twenty-three to twenty-four days
from observations on two nests watched by Colonel Duthie.
SanpwicH TERN (Sterna cantiaca).—TIwenty days. Not
given by Mr. Evans.
Arctic TERN (S. macrura).—Twenty days. Not given by
Mr. Evans, but the Common Tern is given as hatching two
on the twenty-first, and one on the twenty-second day, in an
incubator.
HERRING-GULL (Larus argentatus).—Twenty-one days. Mr.
Evans gives the twenty-sixth day under a hen.
LEssER BLACK-BACKED GULL (L. fuscus).—Twenty-one
days. Not given by Mr. Evans.
RazorBILL (Alca torda).—Twenty-five days, Mr. Evans
gives the thirtieth day in an incubator. Both Mr. Evans
and Mr. Paynter remark that they cannot be absolutely
certain that the eggs were fresh.
Common GuiILLEMoT (Uria troidle).—Thirty-two days. Mr.
Evans gives the thirtieth and thirty-third days for two eggs
in an incubator, and thirty-first day for one under a hen.
PuFFIN (Fratercula arctica).—Thirty-six days. In this case
Mr. Paynter took eight eggs from different nests, and those
which hatched out last he took as giving the correct period.
Mr. Evans also gives the thirty-sixth day in an incubator.
It will be seen that the results arrived at by Mr. Paynter
and Mr. Evans differ considerably in many cases. Both
authors took great care that the eggs used should be perfectly
fresh, although in cases where the bird lays only a single egg
this is somewhat difficult to ensure. There is no doubt con-
siderable individual variation, and we shall hope that other
ornithologists will take up the subject, so that sufficient
observations may be made on this interesting subject to enable
us to strike a reliable average of the incubation period in
various species.
In the same article Mr. Paynter makes some interesting
remarks on the way in which Gulls, hatched in an incubator,
practised flying by allowing the wind to lift them a few feet,
66 BRITISH BIRDS.
and then dropping down again. This was practised for a
week and even ten days before the birds were able to balance
themselves well enough to fly any distance.
KR os
Tue NIGHTINGALE IN DERBYSHIRE.—Mr. W. H. Walton
writes that since he recorded the occurrence of several
nightingales in 1901 at Mickleover and Ockbrook, near Derby,
they have not been seen or heard until this year. On May
8th one was noticed at Chellaston, about four miles south of
Derby, and was, up to May 13th, attracting large numbers
of listeners (Field, 1908, p. 831). Nightingales, the Rev. F.C. R.
Jourdain tells us, breed sporadically in south Derbyshire, north
of the Trent, almost every year, but the above is a good deal
further north than usual. Any records of the distribution of
this bird towards the borders of its range are interesting.
SuprposED WoopcHaT IN CorNwaLu.—Mr. G. H. Coles
records (Field, 1908, p. 831) that he watched within forty
feet with strong binoculars a Woodchat Shrike (L. pomeranus)
on the downs near Sennen (Land’s End) on May 13th last.
The only description he gives of the bird is: “ It was a male
bird in brilliant plumage, and the chestnut colour of the
back of the head and neck was particularly bright.” It is
very possible that the bird was a Woodchat, but it is really
impossible to accept such records as authentic unless better
descriptions are given. The Woodchat has so many dis-
tinguishing characteristics in the field that there is really no
excuse in this case.—H.F.W.
HaBits OF THE Cuckoo.—Mr. F. Banister writes in the
“Field” (6, vr., 1908, p. 932) to the effect that he watched a
Cuckoo visit a Hedge-Sparrow’s nest, containing three eggs, in
a hedge. The Cuckoo went to the nest and emerged in about
a minute with one of the Hedge-Sparrow’s eggs in its bill.
This it proceeded to break up and, apparently, eat. On going
to the nest, Mr. Banister found one Cuckoo’s egg and two
Hedge-Sparrow’s. The author thinks that the Cuckoo laid
the egg in the nest, but this does not seem to be proved in
this case. The Cuckoo was at the nest for a very short time,
and the egg might have been carried inside the mouth
without attracting the attention of the observer. Observa-
tions on the actual depositing of eggs by Cuckoos, being few,
are always welcome (cf. B.B., Vol. I., p. 283).—H.F.W.
I
ry : Y 5 \4)
Te 710 BR} >
=) ee Sy)
m to x
-
The British Warblers—A History, with Problems of their
Inves. By H. Eliot Howard, F.Z.S., M.B.0.U. Parts
I. and II. Coloured and photogravure plates. (R. H.
Porter.) 21s. net per part.
THis work promises to be of quite unusual interest and
importance on account of the original observations on the
habits of many of the birds of which it treats. On this account,
and also for the plates depicting various seldom-seen attitudes,
it is to be highly commended. The plates—some in colour
and some in photogravure—represent the best work we. have
yet seen from Mr. Gronvold. Those showing various attitudes
assumed during courtship are especially lifelike, and these
have been drawn from Mr. Howard’s originals.
Part I. is concerned with the Sedge-Warbler and the
Grasshopper-Warbler, and Part II. with the Chiffchaff and
the Yellow-browed Warbler. The observations on the habits
of the first three mentioned species should be read by everyone
interested in bionomical questions. To enable him to make
such detailed studies as are here set forth on the daily life of
these secretive little birds Mr. Howard must be endowed with
a patience beyond most men, and it is evident that he must
also be a persistently early riser. There are, too, several
thoughtful passages on evolutionary subjects—such as sexual
selection, and the plasticity of instinct—which deserve careful
perusal.
We may here draw attention to a few of the points brought
out by Mr. Howard’s observations. In the three species
mentioned, the males appear to arrive at the breeding place
a week or ten days before the females. The area in which
the nesting operations are to take place is apparently chosen
by the male, and he spends much of his time in guarding
this area from all other males of his species. It has often
been noted that the same nesting site has been used for
many years by a pair of the same species. We believe that
this is much more generally the case than is supposed, and in
such instances it may be concluded that if either of the pair
dies during the winter the survivor brings a new mate to the
nesting site the next spring. If only the males choose the
nesting territory then it is puzzling how it occurs that the
same place is occupied for many years in succession, unless,
indeed, the heir returning to the locality of his birth finds his
68 BRITISH BIRDS.
father no more and steps into his shoes. Birds are creatures
of habit, as Mr. Howard demonstrates, and if the males come
back to the same territory then the females do also, and if so,
surely the same two birds are mated as long as both live.
Would not this account for the apparent absence of choice
by the female of any particular male (see Grasshopper- Warbler,
p. 14)? Is there always an absence of choice, or has it so
happened that Mr. Howard has watched previously mated
birds, and not those which have never before been mated ?
We hope that Mr. Howard, with his great powers of observa-
tion, will give us in a future instalment the result of his
observations on this point, for it seems to us most unlikely
that birds choose a new mate each spring.
We have space only to allude to some of the many other
interesting facts so pleasantly recorded in these pages. A
curious feature in the courting display of these three species
is that the male frequently picks up a leaf or stick and holds
it in its beak while following the female. The females do
most of the building of the nest and the feeding of the young ;
the feces of the young are sometimes swallowed by the parent
bird, as they are almost invariably by the Thrushes; the
song of the Grasshopper-Warbler almost ceases after pairing
is over; the nestlings of the same species leave the nest when
only a few days old, and some time before they are able to
There is so much that is good in this book that we are
somewhat unwilling to criticize. We must, however, express
the opinion that the general plan of the work appears to us
to be unwise. The descriptions of the plumages are most un-
satisfactory in that they add little or nothing to our knowledge,
which is a great pity, for we know little of the sequences
of the plumages of these birds, and the moults they go through.
Then in species such as the Yellow-browed Warbler, with
which presumably the author has no acquaintance, no account
of habits is given. Thus the work is incomplete, and in no
sense a monograph. It seems to us a pity that the author
did not confine himself to a description of the habits only
(with the plates illustrating them) of those species which he
had observed. The work as at present planned is expensive.
The valuable original observations ought to have been made
accessible to all ornithologists, and might have been so
without any loss to science by the omission of what is not
valuable. If we may make a further criticism, it is that the
parts should appear at shorter intervals. Part I. was pub-
lished in February, 1907, Part II. in March, 1908.
_ moxm LY -ONE:SHILLING: NET
~ S2SHIIGHTOLBORNIENDON
- i FS
’ ~~ i re es ape + 3 lil a é
i Lt Ue ee
EGGS OF PALEARCTIC BIRDS. —
A ‘Work on this ‘subject, illuatrated with BEAUTIFULLY. i
COLOURED PLATES, is now being issued,
Write for Pall Prospectus and 2a Part for inspection to
WILLIAMS & NORGATE,
44, Menrletis ‘Street, Covent Garden, London, W.C.
- DALLMEYER’S ©
Naturalists’ Camera,
j to07_ MODEL,
F Or Telephoto or Ordinary LENSES.
DALLMEYER'S is
~» Lenses are used
by the most:
‘oa ae skilled Bird |.
Photographers. °
& ; bs The Pollowing na
f = ‘ ky spectally recommended : :
THE STIGMATIC SERIES Il. F/6 Gone ey:
THE SERIES D PATENT PORTRAIT LENSES F 6G.
(A Rapid Long Focus Lens at a Moderate Price.)
ties or Moderate Power Telephoto Lenses (Original Make).
We are. Specialists in Cameras and Apparatus jor Photo- Ornithologists ais
CATALOGUES; AND ADVICE FREE.
JH. DALLMEYER, Limite, eNzIL RD,, i
Showrooms: 25, NEWMAN Bn Ww. NEASDEN, LONDON, NW. ,
WATKINS & DONCASTER,
Waturalists, :
And. Manufacturers of CABINETS and APPARATUS for Entomology, Bird! fees
and. Skins,’ and all Branches of Natural History.
A LARGE STOCK OF INSECTS, and BIRDS’ EGGS and SKINS, 8, Cee
Speciality: :-Objects for Nature Study, Drawing Classes, &c. .
BIRDS, MAMMALS, &e.; PRESERVED and MOUNTED by SARE REARS WORKMEN d
TRUE TO NATUR
All Books and Publications on Natural History supplied.
36, STRAND, LONDON, W.C. (Five Doors from Charing Gross.)
"Catalogue (102 pp.) post free. ana
DRHEHIBIRDS
Serre BY HH. F. WITHERBY, F.ZS8., M.B.O.U.
feel) BY W. P. PYCRAFT, A.LS., M.B.0.U.
ContTENTS OF NUMBER 3, Vor. II. Aveust 1, 1908.
The Wood-Pigeon Diphtheria: The Results of the ‘‘ BrrrisH
Birps”’ Enquiry, by C. B. Ticehurst, M.A., M.R.C.S.,
i. B.O.P.,..M.B.0.U., <: « A . Page 69
Variations in the Nests of ‘he Asciie and Conca Teens:
by F. B. Kirkman, B.A., oxon. .. 78
On the More Important Additions to our : Renwiodes of
British Birds since 1899, by H. F. Witherby and N. F.
Ticehurst. Part XII. (continued from page 57) .. Ns 83
Large-billed Reed-Bunting (Emberiza pyrrhuloides palustris)
in Kent: a new British Bird, by M. J. Nicoll, M.B.o.v. 88
Notes :—Curious Site for a Robin’s Nest (A. G. Leigh).
Grey-headed Wagtail in Sussex (J. H. Gurney).
Nesting of the Grey Wagtail in Berkshire (W. Norman
May). An Early Recorded Waxwing (H. E. Forrest).
Lesser Redpolls Nesting in Surrey (Charles Oldham).
Have Starlings Increased Beyond the Capacity of
Nesting Sites ? (Fred. A. Herbert). Nutcracker in Kent
(Eds.). Climbing Movements of the Green Woodpecker
(Col. H. W. Feilden). Marsh-Harriers in Norfolk (W. P.
Pycraft). Ducks’ Eggs and Down (Norman Gilroy).
Inland Nesting of the Sheld-Duck, and Nesting of
Pochard, Shoveler and Teal in Lincolnshire (Rev. F. L.
Blathwayt). Nesting of the Shoveler in Staffordshire
(W. Wells Bladen). Pochard Nesting in South-west
Kent (Major R. Sparrow). Unusual Nesting Sites and
Incubation Period of the Tufted Duck (Major H. Trevel-
yan). Teal and Pheasant Laying in the Same Nest
(C. E. Pearson). Pallas’s Sand-Grouse in England
(H. F.W.). Black-tailed Godwit and Spotted Redshank
in Kent (Major R. Sparrow). Change of Nesting Sites
Through Human Influence (T. Harrison), etc. .. 90
THE WOOD-PIGEON DIPHTHERIA.
Tur Resuuts or THE “ British Brrps” ENQUIRY.
BY
foe LICHHURST, M.A., M.R.C.S., L.R.C.P., M.B.0.U.
Durine the past autumn and winter Wood-Pigeons in
this country were ravaged by the disease known as
‘““Wood-Pigeon diphtheria.” This disease has been
known for some years by gamekeepers and sportsmen
70 BRITISH BIRDS.
as occurring during acorn or beech-mast years, though
the causa morbi has not been so generally understood.
In BritisH Brrps (Vol. I., p. 243) I gave an account
of the micro-organism which was responsible for the
disease, the naked-eye appearance of birds dead of the
disease, and other facts as far as were known. In order
to ascertain more facts concerning this matter, at the
suggestion of the Editors of BritisH Birps, I drew up
a schedule of questions which was sent round to all
readers of the Magazine for the purpose of securing help
from those who were interested in the subject, and the
results of this enquiry I now set forth. I must here
express my great indebtedness to all those who filled
in schedules, and so kindly supplied the information
upon which the following conclusions and suggestions
are based.
I have thought it better to group the facts under the
following headings :—
I.—Geographical distribution.
II.—Migratory flocks.
I1I.—Transmission of the disease.
IV.—Duration and course of the disease.
V.—Relation to food supply.
VI.—Transmission to other animals.
VII.—Post-mortem appearances.
I.—GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION.—From the ac-
companying map it will be clear that the reports show
that the disease was almost entirely confined to those
counties which border the Thames Valley. The only
positive returns received from other more distant
counties were from Yorkshire, Cumberland, Norfolk,
Essex, and doubtfully from Devon. Now, from all
these counties the reports seem to show that the
disease was local, or confined to isolated birds. For
instance, in Norfolk no disease was noted until the first
fortnight in February, when only one or two birds with
disease are recorded, whilst there is definite evidence
that the only occurrences in Essex were those from a
C. B. TICEHURST: WOOD-PIGEON DIPHTHERIA. 71
migratory flock which arrived in the last week of January,
stayed a week, and in which nearly every bird was
diseased. From Cumberland it was reported that there
”
GB Positive, many.
RR Positive, few.
ie Sporadic cases.
illlll! Negative.
“ps p
~ Notts ;“ Linc?
lees
a
WIth
We oe
oS Leicester Vang” Bs
{J J .
: semaweat (Hl :.
fim NA. ne) dar
as ee!
52)
/
eee v
=_-
) _-
Sketch Map to show the distribution of Wood-Pigeon Diphtheria in
the Winter of 1907-8,
were a few diseased birds, but one would have liked to
have had more details on the distribution in this county.
72 BRITISH BIRDS.
From Yorkshire the disease was only noted in two places,
and those only in single examples, though presumably
there must have been others. The counties in which the
disease was most prevalent were: Wiltshire, Buckingham-
shire (S.), Berkshire (N.), Oxfordshire (8.), and Hampshire ;
to a lesser degree in West Sussex, West Kent, and Surrey ;
and it seems undeniable that the centre of the disease
lay in an area covered by beech wood in the Thames
Valley in the counties of Berkshire, Oxfordshire, and
Buckinghamshire, and in one place on the borders of
these three counties the number of diseased Pigeons
reached such extraordinary proportions that 2242 were
burnt, and it is estimated that another 2000 were
disposed of. From Scotland and Ireland only negative
reports were received.
II.—Mieratory Fiocxs.—Nearly all observers agreed
that the migratory Pigeons arrived at the end of October
or beginning of November, that they increased in numbers
during November, and decreased towards the end of
January, and that by the end of February most of the
migratory birds had gone.
These migratory flocks probably come from Central
Europe, as large migratory flocks appear in Holland in
the autumn ; it has been often suggested that these flocks
come from Scandinavia, but as this bird is only found
in southern Scandinavia, and is not particularly numerous
there, this theory is untenable.
That the disease occurred mainly in these migratory
flocks most observers agreed, some, indeed, asserting that
the resident birds were never attacked, but this is very
difficult to prove.
There is little doubt that the disease was found where
there was a great increase of Pigeons in the autumn,
and, as a rule, where there were few birds no disease was
noted, though in one or two exceptional cases there were
large numbers and no disease.
III.—TRANSMISSION OF THE DisEASE.—Very little
light seems to have been thrown by schedule returns
C. B. TICEHURST: WOOD-PIGEON DIPHTHERIA. 73
on the transmission of the disease. It can easily be
understood that transmission of a disease from member
to member in a vast horde, as in any crowded community,
can take place in a number of different ways. For
example, the exudation from a diseased bird’s throat
may easily be “coughed ”’ out (and, as breathing gets
more difficult, it is natural that it should be), and may
fall on to the plumage of a neighbouring bird which, in
turn, preens itself and takes up, of course, the bacilli.
Another way, which I suggested in Britis Birps,
was that a diseased Pigeon after eating an acorn re-
gurgitated it, and this, being picked up by another Pigeon,
transmitted the bacilli of the disease. This suggestion
seems to have been quite misunderstood by some people,
for one writer in the “ Field” shortly afterwards wrote
to say, that “except at the time they are feeding their
young, Pigeons do not regurgitate . . . and there
is no need to assume regurgitation, or to attribute to them
a habit which has not been observed ’’—which is absurd,
since if there is any obstruction in the gullet, solid food
will be regurgitated immediately that obstruction is
reached.
Moreover, I have Mr. A. H. Patterson’s evidence that
he had a Pigeon sent him by a friend who had shot it,
and that on the ground where the bird was sitting there
lay an acorn which it had evidently tried to swallow and
had regurgitated.
Both young and old birds are affected, though the
occurrence of the disease in nestlings requires con-
firmation.
IV.—DvuRATION AND CoURSE OF THE DisEASE.—No
definite observations were made on this subject, though
it was inferred that from the condition of the birds
that the malady sometimes ran a quick course and
sometimes a lingering one.
Through the kindness of Dr. Eyre and Mr. Leeming,
bacteriologists of Guy’s Hospital, I was enabled to have
two Pigeons inoculated, and so obtain direct evidence of
74 BRITISH BIRDS.
the length and course of the disease. The Pigeons
inoculated were a wild Wood-Pigeon and a blue “ racer.”
In both, the inside of the throat was pricked, and some
‘“membrane ” from a Pigeon dead of the disease was
rubbed on. The next day both had contracted the disease,
as manifested by a white spot the size of a pin’s head,
the neighbouring parts being reddened. These spots
remained apparently of the same size for about five days,
the birds feeding and looking well, but at the end of aweek,
whereas the patch in the Wood-Pigeon had noticeably in-
creased, that in the blue ‘‘racer”’ had noticeably decreased,
and by the next day had entirely gone, and the tem-
perature of this bird, which had risen from 104.8° F.
(normal) to 107° F. during the period of infection, dropped
again to its normal. The Wood-Pigeon’s temperature, on
the other hand (whose normal temperature is 108°), went
up to and remained between 109° and 110° F. At the end
of ten days the patch was greatly increased, and by twelve
days it had extended across the middle of the throat.
The Pigeon still ate peas and corn fairly well, and kept
in good feather, but was much thinner. The patch
continued to grow, and towards the end of the third week
it had almost blocked the gullet, though it left the wind-
pipe free. At this time it did not feed so well, and its
temperature fell to several degrees below normal, and
remained so until it died on the twenty-first day of the
disease.
The recovery of the blue ‘ racer,” after taking the
disease, is worthy of note, though from a single obser-
vation it could not be said that the disease cannot be
fatal to it, though it suggests that it has a better
resisting power than has the Wood-Pigeon.
V.—RELATION TO Foop Suppty.—The idea amongst
gamekeepers, as well as amongst other people, was that
the disease was caused by the food supply. Of course, he
of the beech woods said it was due to the excess of beech-
mast, whilst he of the oak was equally confident that it
was due to the plentiful supply of acorns, and they both
C. B. TICEHURST: WOOD-PIGEON DIPHTHERIA. 75
agreed that the disease was prevalent during beech-mast
or acorn years. ‘This difference of opinion is strong
evidence that the disease is not directly due to the kind
of food supply, but due to massing.
In any crowded community the incidence of a contagious
disease is always high, and where in a less crowded one
a disease may be endemic, in a greatly crowded one it
will become epidemic. This rule applies in no less degree
to Wood-Pigeons, and it is the abundant food supply
which accounts for the massing, and the massing which
favours the spread of the disease.
From the returns it would appear that where there was
any disease there was, in most cases, a plentiful supply
of either acorns or beech-masts, and in a few cases a _
plentiful supply of either corn or green crops.
VI.—TRANSMISSION TO OTHER ANIMALS.—That this
particular disease is transmissible to other animals seems
certain, for Loffler, in his orginal researches on this
micro-organism inoculated, with mild results, fowls and
rabbits ; guinea-pigs and rats suffered more severely ;
while Wood-Pigeons and Sparrows succumbed.
From observations sent in there is little to record.
Two observers noted the disease in Stock-Doves, one in a
Tawny Owl, and one or two affirm that they have seen it
in Pheasants and Partridges. In no case, however,
were any of these birds sent in for examination bac-
teriologically, and therefore there must always be some
doubt as to whether the disease was the same as that
under consideration. On the other hand, I have made
several enquiries as regards Pheasants and Partridges
being affected in quarters where it might be expected,
‘but have always received a negative answer, and on one
estate where about 4000 Wood-Pigeons were destroyed
last winter, and where 3000 Pheasants are shot every year,
no case of “diphtheria”? in Pheasants had ever been
known.
The only other evidence I have on this matter is of a
negative character, namely, that on this same estate
76 BRITISH BIRDS.
Rooks, Crows, rats, and ferrets fed largely on the diseased
Pigeons without apparently contracting the disease ;
also that numbers were eaten by labourers, etc., without
any ill effect accruing; but, of course, in the latter case
the Pigeons were cooked, and this would kill the micro-
organisms.
The question has often been asked whether this Pigeon
disease is the same as diphtheria in the human subject.
This is an intricate bacteriological subject, and a discussion
on the pros and cons would be quite out of place here ;
suffice it to say that the causative bacilli of the two diseases
are different in character, and as yet there is no proof
that the characteristics of Bacillus diphtherie columbarum
change to the characteristics of Bacillus Klebs-Liffler
(human diphtheria bacillus) on transplantation from the
Pigeon to the human throat.
Dr. Sambon, in an interesting paper in the “ Lancet ”
(April 18th, 1908, p. 1143) on the “ Epidemiology of
Diphtheria,” in order to account for the increased amount
of diphtheria on the eastern seaboard (where, as he says,
Pigeons mass together in the autumn and winter) favours
the suggestion of the transmissibility of Pigeon diphtheria
to the human subject. Unfortunately, he takes only the
deaths from the disease, and not the incidence of the
disease, which will be found to be quite a different thing.
Whatever it may have been in the years in which his
statistics were made up (1855-80), this year, at any rate,
as I have shown, there was practically no Pigeon disease
in those counties, the disease being practically confined
to inland counties bordering the Thames—the very
counties which he shows to have the lowest diphtheria
death-rate. The returns for the last nine months from
these counties are not yet made up, so there are not
yet any statistics to show whether there has been any
corresponding rise in the incidence of human diphtheria.
VII.—Post-MorRTEM APPEARANCES.—The most in-
variable appearance after death is the presence of a
cheesy yellow “false membrane ”’ over the hard palate,
C. B. TICEHURST: WOOD-PIGEON DIPHTHERIA. 77
fauces, and base of tongue, and the glands in the neigh-
bourhood enlarged. The mass is sometimes so large as
to block entirely the gullet, though it is much rarer to
find the windpipe pressed on to any extent; the parts
around the ‘membrane’ are inflamed. With the
formation of this false membrane death of the underlying
tissues takes place, even the bones being affected ; thus
in advanced cases it was common to find the base of the
skull reduced to a cheesy mass. In a few cases the
membrane extended down the gullet into the crop, and
in one instance it had perforated the proventriculus, and
the bird had died from peritonitis which had resulted.
In most cases the crop was empty. The condition of
the birds varied, some being very wasted, others being
in good condition. Those which had contracted a virulent
type of the disease, or had a low resisting power, succumbed
quickly, and so had not time to waste, while those which
had lingered long with the disease, or had the gullet
occluded, partially or wholly, were correspondingly thin.
ene)
VARIATION, IN THE NESIS. OF THE ARCTIG
AND COMMON TERNS.
BY
F. B. KIRKMAN, B.a., oxon.
In a recent number of BritisH Brrps* Mr. W. P. Pycraft
contributed a highly stimulating paper on the subject
of nests, with special reference to those of the Ringed
Plover. It dealt not only with variation in site and
material, but also with the origin of the nest-building
Fic. 1.—Nest of Common Tern.
instinct. The present paper supplements his observations
on the first of these two subjects. It is based on the
examination of some fifty nests of Arctic and Common
Terns, and will, it is trusted, help to throw further light
on what is a very obscure problem.
* Vol. I., pp. 373-380.
F. B. KIRKMAN: VARIATION IN NESTS OF TERNS. 79
The Arctic Terns’ nests were found, during the summer
of 1905. in the protected area at the south end of Walney
Island, off Barrow-in-Furness. I made careful notes of
thirty, of which thirteen lay on the patches of bare sand
in between the sandhills, eleven in the shingle patches
that alternated with the sand, four on the beach, and two
among the bent, a rough stringy grass growing abundantly
at Walney, and serving to cord up the wind-made shifting
sandhills, thus rendering them more or less permanent.
Fic. 2.—Pebble-paved Nest of Arctic Tern on Beach.
There were four distinct types of nest with intermediate
forms. The majority, eighteen in number, representing
the first type, were made of varying amounts of bent.
Nearly all these nests proclaimed the individuality of
their architects. Some consisted of an outer circle of
bent, the inside being left bare. One, evidently the
work of a bird with a geometrical turn of mind, showed
a semi-circle of bent, and a semi-circle of sand, while
another was adorned with an oyster-shell and a feather,
if not put there, in any case left unremoved. To some
80 BRITISH BIRDS.
bits of wood had been added. In half a dozen instances
the birds were seemingly content to preserve appear-
ances by merely placing or leaving two or three quite
useless stalks of bent around or across the nest. None
were as complete as the Common Tern’s shown in the
first of my photographs (Fig. 1). It marks the highest
form of this type of nest.
The second type was represented by three nests paved
with pebbles (Fig. 2). If the use of these pavements
Fig. 3.—Arctic Tern’s Nest in Sand.
is to keep the eggs dry by raising them above the level
of soil liable to become damp, then we must deny the Terns
in question any sense of the meaning of their acts, for
their pavements were placed either on loose grit (Fig. 2)
or on loose sand, through both of which water would
rapidly sink. How unnecessary the pavement was is
shown by the third type, represented by two scraped
depressions in the bare sand. I kept the one shown in
Fig. 3 under close observation in foul weather and fair,
and had the pleasure of watching the owner (Fig. 4) hatch
out both her young successfully.
F. B. KIRKMAN: VARIATION IN NESTS OF TERNS. 81
The fourth type was of a somewhat transitory nature.
It was represented by three nests placed on the beach
in the high-water mark seaweed, the one photographed
(Fig. 5) being enlivened, accidentally, perhaps, with a
crab’s claw and a cork. These builders showed more
originality than discretion, two of the nests being des-
troyed by the sea: one of the eggs, in an unbroken state,
going to form part of the stranded drift.
Fic. 4.—Arctic Tern sitting on Nest in Sand.
The remaining four nests were highly instructive, being
a combination of the first two types. They were all
paved with pebbles, to which bits of bent (Fig. 6*), and in
one case a complete outer circle of bent, were added.
It is worth noting that there was no definite relation
between site and material, except in respect to the two
nests in the bent, which were made of bent, and those in
the seaweed. The pebble-paved, the bent nests, and
* This figure will appear in the second instalment of this article.
82 BRITISH BIRDS.
the bare scraped depressions were to be found both among
the shingle and on the sand patches.
On referring to the “Manual” of the late Howard
Saunders, I find that the Arctic Tern, besides laying
““in- a depression of the sand, or on scanty herbage,”
will place its eggs ‘‘ on the bare rock, just out of reach of
the waves.’ Here we have, then, a fifth type, which
might have been represented at Walney if there had
been any rocks,
Fie. 5.—Arctic Tern’s Nest in high-water mark drift.
The half-dozen nests of the Common Tern that I
examined at Walney, were, as already noted, of the type
illustrated by Fig. 1. But the late H. A. Macpherson,
visiting the place in 1891, has left on record, in his
‘“‘ Fauna of Lakeland,” that some of these birds, building
on the upper beach, started a new fashion: their nests
being lined with rabbit bones. This innovation appears
to have died out, the rabbits presumably not seeing
their way to provide the necessary material in adequate
quantities.
(To be continued.)
(aan)
ON THE MORE IMPORTANT ADDITIONS TO OUR
KNOWLEDGE OF BRITISH BIRDS SINCE 1899.
BY
H. F. WITHERBY anv N. F. TICHHURST.
Pau, XU
(Continued from page 57.)
TUFTED DUCK Fuligula cristata (Leach). 8S. page 447.
SussEx.—Recorded as breeding in the county (J. G. Millais,
Vict. Hist. Sussex, Vol. I.).
Hampsuire.—First known to nest in the county in 1890,
since then its breeding range has rapidly increased, and six
or seven localities are enumerated where nests have been
found (J. HE. Kelsall and P. W. Munn, B. of Hants, p. 233
et seq.).
SomersET.—Nested at Blagdon Reservoir in 1906 (F. L.
Blathwayt, Zool., 1908, p. 114).
Bucxs.—Breeds at Weston Turville (Rothschild and
Hartert, Vict. Hist. Bucks., p. 146).
Dersy.—They first began to resort regularly for breeding
to Osmaston Manor lake in 8.W. Derbyshire, in 1886. Since
then a brood or two have been reared almost every year, and
at least two hatched off in 1899. [Now there are seldom fewer
than seven or eight pairs to be found there in the breeding
season (F.C. R. J., an litt., 1908).] From Osmaston they have
spread to neighbouring ponds, where they have bred regularly
since about 1888. They were observed on the Ashbourne
Hall pond in 1892, and a pair bred at Sturston Mill in
1895 (F. C. R. Jourdain, Zool., 1899, p. 476). They have
also established themselves at Bradley, further to the east
(id., t.c., 1900, p. 429), and, still more recently, at Norbury
m 1907 (id., Derby. N.H.S. Journ., 1908).
STAFFORDSHIRE.— Besides the Weston Park colony referred
to below, this species first bred at Calwich Abbey in 1906
(F. C. R. Jourdain, in litt.).
SHROPSHIRE.—Has bred regularly at Weston Park, on the
borders of Shropshire and Staffordshire since 1880. Its
numbers have steadily increased, and in 1890 there were
84, BRITISH BIRDS.
about twenty pairs nesting on five or six ponds. At Sandford
Pool, near Whitchurch, on the Cheshire border, four pairs
nested in i891, and have continued to do so since, but have
not increased. One or two pairs have bred since 1855, and
still do so, at Hatton, near Shifnal (H. E. Forrest, Zool.,
1900, pp. 506 ef seq.).
NortH Wates.—Breeds in Anglesey, and possibly in
Merioneth (H. E. Forrest, Vert. Fauna N. Wales, p. 286).
YORKSHIRE.—Increasing as a nesting species (T. H. Nelson,
B. of Yorks., p. 467).
CUMBERLAND.—First bred in 1888 (Zool., 1888, p. 330).
Scottish BorpER.—Within the last twenty years they
have begun to nest at nearly every suitable loch, or large sheet
of water, on either side of the Border, z.e., in Northumberland,
Berwick, and Roxburgh (A. Chapman, Bird-Life Borders,
p. 92).
ScoTLAND.—The increase and extension of range of the
Tufted Duck in Scotland is one of the most interesting events
in British ornithology. Mr. J. A. Harvie-Brown has written
two admirable papers on the subject (Ann. S.N.H., 1896,
pp. 3-22; Proc. Royal Phys. Soc. Edin., Vol. XIII., pp.
144-160), and to these all who are interested in the subject
must make reference. Not many records have been published
since the date of these papers, but the following may be
noted :—
Solway.—Has spread through the area since 1887 until
now every suitable loch has at least one pair (R. Service,
Ann. S.N.H., 1897, p. 222). Ayrshire-—A parent bird with
young was seen on Loch Kilbirnie in 1905 (t.c., 1906, 198).
Although very common in East Renfrewshire it appears
slow in spreading to Ayrshire. West Lothian.—Bred in 1906
and 1907 (S. E. Brock, t.c., 1907, 185); has bred regularly
in the eastern part of the district for the last ten years (B.
Campbell, f.c., 1907, 249). Tay Basin.—Has increased
enormously since the first record of its nesting was reported.
Now it is ‘‘ one of the commonest ducks on all suitable lochs
throughout the central and east portions, and just outside the
S.W. boundary of the area in Forth” (J. A. Harvie-Brown,
Vert. Fauna Tay Basin, etc., pp. 240 et seq.).
North of latitude 56° it is rare at all seasons on the west
coast, but all over the lowlands of Caithness and the extreme
east of Sutherland it is exceedingly abundant (dem).
Outer Hebrides.—On the increase ; actual nesting took place
in South Uist in 1903 (id., Ann. S.N.H., 1903, p. 245). Mac-
gillivray states that it was formerly a common bird in the
Outer Hebrides, but it is quite certain that they almost en-
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 85
tirely disappeared for a long time, indeed since he wrote (id.,
Fauna N.W. Highlands, etc., p. 237). Four pairs seen in
1906, and one in 1907 by N. B. Kinnear and P. H. Bahr
(Ann. S.N.H., 1907, pp. 83 and 213).
IRELAND.—Several pairs were seen, and a nest found on
Lough Conn, co. Mayo, in 1905 (R. Warren, Irish Nat., 1905,
p. 165). Ten or twelve broods were observed, a young bird
was shot and an egg taken on Lough Mask, co. Galway, in
1906 (A. R. Nichols, t.c., 1907, p. 184). Both these records
are extensions of its previously-known breeding range in
Ireland. Major A. Trevelyan informs us (7 litt.) that on
May 13th last he saw a pair on Lough Derg, co. Donegal, in
which county we believe it has not yet been recorded as
nesting.
SCAUP-DUCK Fuligula marila (L.). 8S. page 449.
SUTHERLAND.—A pair of Scaups was watched, and the
nest found in rushes five feet from the water, on a small island.
in a loch in 1899, by Mr. Heatley Noble. The nest contained
three eggs. It was left for a week, and the female bird was
then seen to leave the nest and was clearly identified. The:
nest now contained nine eggs (J. A. Harvie-Brown, Ann.
S.N.H., 1899, p. 215).
OvutTER HeEBRipES.—It nested in one of the islands south
of the Sound of Harris in 1897, 8, and 9, and three pairs in
1900. Probably also again in 1901, and certainly in 1902
(J. A. Harvie-Brown, t.c., 1902, p. 211). A nest with nine
eggs was found on an island in a loch in one of the Uists in
1906, and the bird was seen to leave its nest (N. B. Kinnear,
Seton ;y, p. 82;:¢f.. P: H. ‘Bahr, ¢.c:, p. 218).
The Rev. F. C. R. Jourdain points out that the first
authentic record of the breeding of the Scaup in Scotland was
that of the late A. C. Stark, who found a nest with eleven
egos at Loch Leven, Fifeshire, in 1880 (cf. Proc. Roy. Phys.
Soc. Hdinb., VII., p. 203). The eggs were sold at Stevens’
for £2 7s. 6d. on June 19th, 1902. This record appears to
have been overlooked by Howard Saunders.
EIDER DUCK Somateria mollissima (L.). 8S. page 459.
CHESHIRE.—An immature bird was seen at Leasowe, on
December 31st, 1905 (C. Oldham, Zool., 1906, p. 75). It is
rare on the north-west coast of England, and has only once
before been recorded from Cheshire.
Scttty IsLEs.—Six examples are recorded (J. Clark and
F. R. Rodd, t.c., 1906, p. 304).
ScorLaAND.—Previously unknown on the west coast of
86 BRITISH BIRDS.
Sutherland, they were present in large numbers in 1901 and
1902, and perhaps for a few years before in every suitable
place from Cape Wrath to Hansa and the Badcall Islands. A
large increase is also noted along the eastern side of South
Uist. Eider are only now (1904) beginning to push their
distribution to any points between Loch Nevis and Badceall
(7.e., W. Ross, and parts of Sutherland and Inverness) (J. A.
Harvie-Brown, Fauna N.W. Highlands and Skye, pp. 244-248).
IRELAND.—A young male was shot in Malahide Estuary,
on the Dublin coast, in November, 1902 (E. Williams, [rish
Nat., 1903, p. 112). To Ireland the Eider is a rare and
irregular winter visitor.
KING-EIDER Somateria spectabilis (L.). S. page 461.
FIFESHIRE.—A male was shot on a moor in Fifeshire on
June 15th, 1899 (B. B. Riviere, Zool., 1902, p. 27).
OrkNEY.—An adult female was shot by Mr. 8. Sutherland
off Graemsay, on February 21st, 1906 (F. Smalley, ¢.c., 1906,
A):
5 Istay.—One was observed by Mr. A. Ross near Kintra
on July 25th, 1906 (Ann. S.N.H., 1907, p. 198).
IRELAND.—A mature male was shot on November 10th,
1897, in the Foreland Bay, off Donaghadee, co. Down, by
Mr. W. H. Shaw (R. Patterson, Jrish Nat., 1901, p. 50).
JERSEY.—Mr. H. Mackay states that he examined a female
bird, and identified it as a King-Eider, which had been shot
at La Roque. He gives no date (H. Mackay, Zool., 1904, p.
380).
COMMON SCOTER Cdemia ngra (L.). 8S. page 465.
TRELAND.—Major H. Trevelyan communicated to the
‘“« Wield ” (15, vir., 05) an account of the nesting of this bird
on one of the larger loughs in Ireland, the exact locality
being suppressed. Between June llth and August 18th,
1904, a pair of birds were constantly observed. On May 24th,
1905, the pair were again observed in the same locality, and
on June 13th the female was found on the nest under a small
bush on an island. There were eight eggs, five of which
hatched between June 28th—30th, and the old bird was seen
on the lough with the five young ones on July Ist. One of
the young was obtained on July 3rd, and afterwards
submitted, with an egg and some of the down from the nest,
to Dr. Bowdler Sharpe, who confirmed the identification.
The egg, down, and feathers from the nest, and the young
bird, were also submitted to Mr. Heatley Noble, who likewise
confirmed the identification (Irish Nat., 1905, p. 200). It is
ADDITIONS: SINCE 1899. 87
much to Major Trevelyan’s credit that he was thus able to
authenticate this most interesting discovery of the first
nesting of this species in Ireland without the destruction of
the parent birds. The birds bred again in 1906 (R. J. Ussher
in litt.).
In 1907 one male and two females were observed on the
lough, but no nest was found. On June 4th, 1908, a nest
with eight eggs was found well concealed in a furze bush on
an island in the same lough, and this year also there appeared
to be a second and solitary female (H. Trevelyan, Field, 4, vit.,
08, p. 3).
SURF-SCOTER Gdemia perspicillata (L.). 8S. page 469.
Scrtty Istes.—Has been obtained twice (J. Clark and F.
R. Rodd, Zool., 1906, p. 304).
CoRNWALL.—An adult male was killed with two Velvet
Scoters on the Helford River on December 16th, 1906 (J.
Clark, i.c., 1907; p. 285).
ORKNEY.—Young birds are of commoner occurrence than
most people suppose, hardly a winter passes without one or
more being seen among the Velvet-Scoters when they first
arrive. The adult birds are much rarer. An adult male
was seen inside Stromness Harbour between December 14th
and 21st, 1905 (H. W. Robinson, Field, 17, 11., 06).
GOOSANDER Mergus merganser L. S. page 471.
ScoTLAND.—A pair was identified off the north end of
North Uist on October 31st, 1905 (A. Elfrish, Ann. S.N.A.,
1906, p. 53). A male was seen off Barra on May 22nd, 1906
(N. B. Kinnear, ¢.c., 1907, p. 83). The bird is of rare occur-
rence in the Outer Hebrides.
SMEW WMergus albellus L. 8S. page 475.
NorFro.tk.—An adult male was shot on Breydon on January
30th, 1907 (B. Dye, Zool., 1907, p. 111). Adult males are rare.
YorRKSHIRE.—An adult was shot at Skelton in the winter
ot 1900 (‘T. H. Nelson, Birds of Yorks., p. 486).
SHETLAND.—One was shot on February 14th, 1901, at
Sconsburgh (Ann. S.N.H., 1902, p. 134). It is a rare visitor
to the Shetlands.
(To be continued.)
( 88 )
LARGE-BILLED REED-BUNTING (EMBERIZA
PYRRHULOIDES PALUSTRIS) IN KENT.
A NEW BRITISH BIRD.
BY
M. J. NICOLL, M.B.0.Uv.
At the meeting of the British Ornithologists’ Club, held
on June 17th last, I exhibited a male specimen of the
South European Large-billed Reed-Bunting (Hmberiza
pyrrhulo des palustris).
This bird, which is new to the British fauna, was
obtained near Lydd, in Kent, on May 26th last. I was
away from home at the time it was shot, and was thus
unable to see it in the flesh, but I examined it shortly
after it was mounted.
The occurrence of this Reed-Bunting in the British
Islands is of interest, not only on account of its being a
new British bird, but also because the commoner and
typical H. p. pyrrhuloides is the form one would expect
to occur in England, as it has done so on Heligoland.
The example obtained in Kent agrees exactly with
specimens in the British Museum from South Italy, in
which country, as well as in Southern France and Spain,
the bird is resident. It may be distinguished at once
from the common Reed-Bunting by its large thick bill.
The typical form of the Thick-billed Reed-Bunting
inhabits the coasts of the Caspian Sea from the foot of
the North Caucasus to the Volga, Transcaspia and
Turkestan, and has occurred once on Heligoland. In
coloration the former is very much paler, the broad white
edges to the feathers of the upperparts, and the pale
grey rump, give the bird an almost silver-grey appearance:
a great contrast to the more sober coloration of the
bird obtained in Kent.
It is somewhat difficult to account for the appearance
of some South European birds in the British Islands.
The present species and all other stragglers which have
M. J. NICOLL: REED-BUNTING IN KENT. 89
occurred, may have joined parties of other species, and
thus found their way to our shores.
In the autumn southerly gales may be the cause of
the visitation of rare Chats and other birds. But some
have occurred in our islands during the height of the
Male Large-billed Reed-Bunting obtained near Lydd, Kent,
on May 26th, 1908.
summer, and these visitations can, I think, only be
accounted for by the supposition that these birds had
lost their mates, or that their nesting had been interfered
with in some way, and that, following the migratory
“impulse,” they had pushed northwards and_ thus
reached the British Islands, far to the north of their
usual limit.
CURIOUS SITE FOR A ROBIN’S NEST.
Rosins have frequently been recorded as nesting in curious
places, but I do not think they have been known to choose
such a remarkable site as the following. A pair relined an
old Blackbird’s nest, situated in a thorn bush, four feet from
the ground, with moss, and were successful in hatching a
brood. A. G. LEIGH.
[The Rev. F. C. R. Jourdain writes :—‘‘ The habit of
breeding in old nests of other species is common in the case of
the Pied Wagtail and occasional in the Tits, Spotted Flycatcher,
and other birds. The habit is, however, rarely recorded of
the Robin. I have a note of one found in an old Swallow’s
nest, and one in an old Hedge-Sparrow’s nest is recorded
by Mr. J. E. Harting (Birds of Middlesex, p. 38).” In a list
of such occurrences published in the “ Zoologist”’ (1905,
p. 33), Mr. R. H. Read records a Robin’s nest in a Thrush’s
nest, and three nests of the Robin one over the other, the top
one containing eggs and the middle one stale eggs of the
previous season. Mr. T. T. Mackeith also records (t.c., p. 69)
a Robin’s nest built upon a Swallow’s nest of the previous year.
Many instances of other birds utilizing the old nests of other
species are on record.—EDs. ]
GREY-HEADED WAGTAIL IN SUSSEX.
In the spring of 1869 or 1870 a Grey-headed Wagtail was
shot at Lancing, in Sussex, not far from the sea, which has, I
am sorry to say, remained until now unidentified. Having,
at the request of Mr. Witherby, submitted it to Mr. N. F.
Ticehurst, that gentleman writes: “It is In my opinion
undoubtedly M. f. borealis. . .. . It is not nearly white
enough on the throat, and is too dark on the head for
M. f. cinereicapilla. It is even darker on the head than most
of my M. f. borealis, but I take it that is due to wear.”
J. H. GURNEY.
NESTING OF THE GREY WAGTAIL IN BERKSHIRE.
On June 13th I noticed a pair of Grey Wagtails (Motacilla
melanope) close to one of the locks on the Kennet and Avon
Canal. After a very short search I found their nest (empty,
but apparently ready for eggs) in the broken woodwork of the
NOTES. 91
side of the lock. On June 18th the nest was visited by the
keeper, and found to contain four eggs. On June 24th I
again visited the place, but unfortunately a barge had been
through the lock in the meantime, and the nest had been
swamped and the eggs washed away. A careful search in
the hole behind the nest showed one broken shell, while the
birds were still near by. The nest was so placed, that when
the lock was filled (in order to enable a barge to pass) it must
have been quite three feet under water.
Mr. Heatley Noble records a nest in the “ Victoria History
of Berkshire,” while I believe another one has been found
more recently by Mr. F. C. Selous, near Newbury.
W. Norman May.
AN EARLY RECORDED WAXWING.
Tue following extract from a letter which I have lately
received from Mr. R. D. Roberts, of St. Asaph, North Wales,
should prove of interest because it refers to one of the first
Waxwings recorded as visiting this country, and it is re-
markable that the specimen, although now 120 years old,
should still be in good condition. Mr. Roberts writes: ‘‘ The
quotation in your ‘ Vertebrate Fauna of North Wales’ from
Pennant’s ‘ British Zoology,’ under the heading ‘ Waxwing ’
(page 130), is interesting to me inasmuch as the bird referred
to is in my possession, and though shot in 1788 is in perfect
condition. The account on the back of the case being nearly
illegible through age I recently had copies printed, and
enclose one.” The label reads as follows :—
Bohemian Chatterer or Waxwing.
(Bombycilla Garrula.)
Kill’d during the cold Frost in December, 1788, at Garth-
Meilio, in the County of Denbigh, by Mr. William Dod,
of Edge, in Cheshire.
It was perching in one of the Fir Trees in the Avenue to
the House.
H. E. Forrest.
LESSER REDPOLLS NESTING IN SURREY.
DurinG a couple of hours spent among the birch trees on
Wimbledon Common on July 12th, I saw a nest of a Lesser
Redpoll (Linota rufescens), in a small birch, with four well-
fledged young ones, another brood on the wing, and at least
five pairs of old birds. Indeed, on this July morning, when
but few birds were singing, the Redpolls uttering their
characteristic call-notes, as they passed from place to place
92 BRITISH BIRDS.
with undecided, wavering flight, high above the tree-tops,
were the outstanding feature in the bird-life of the common.
CHARLES OLDHAM.
[For former records of the Lesser Redpoll nesting on
Wimbledon Common and in other places in Surrey, see Vol. L.,
p. 184.—H. F. W.]
HAVE STARLINGS INCREASED BEYOND THE
CAPACITY OF NESTING SITES ?
Late last year two packs of Starlings of about 1000 each
took possession of a young larch plantation near Ross,
Herefordshire. Every evening the numbers increased until
it was impossible to make any estimate of them, but to give
some idea, I saw on one occasion a field of about four acres
so covered with them that it was difficult to see any soil at
all. Their movements, as night drew near, were a source
of great interest to me. At times they would wheel for
half-an-hour in the air, each battalion independent of the
other ; at others they would settle in high trees and maintain
a ceaseless chattering ; while, once or twice, being apparently
still hungry, they would settle on ploughed ground and busily
search for food.
The majority have distributed and paired, but there are
still a number of small packs, ten to twenty in each, which
pass my house every night on their way to roost, and I have
noticed for the last three years that many remained unpaired.
These are neither old birds which have done nesting, for as
yet (June 7th) I have seen no young birds abroad ; nor are
they for the same reason young birds. What, then, is the
reason for these bachelor habits ?
It cannot be that there are greater numbers of either sex,
because Nature’s balance is very even ; nor can it be that they
do not breed until the second season.
Is it possible that there are not enough suitable nesting
places for so many ?
FreD. A. HERBERT.
NUTCRACKER IN KENT.
In Vol. I., p. 388, we referred to a Nutcracker which had been
reported by Mr. N. F. Richardson as having been shot in Kent
on December 29th, 1907. On page 28 of the present volume
Mr. G. M. Beresford-Webb suggested that this might have
been a bird which escaped from his aviaries. Mr. Richardson
has very kindly submitted the bird, with full particulars,
to Mr. Beresford-Webb for examination, and that gentleman
NOTES. 93
writes us that “as far as it is possible to see the bird appears
to be similar to the one which escaped.” It was shot only
six miles from Mr. Beresford-Webb’s house, and three days
after his bird had escaped, and little doubt remains that it
was in fact his bird and not a wild one.—Eps.
CLIMBING MOVEMENTS OF THE GREEN
WOODPECKER.
THIS season a pair of Green Woodpeckers (Gecinus viridis)
made a hole in a decaying cherry tree in the orchard next our
garden, in the village of Burwash. I could, from a garden
seat, watch them within fifty yards. The hen bird appeared
to be sitting by the middle of May. The male bird was
constantly bringing his mate food, and would fix himself
on the trunk for ten minutes at a time, partly supporting
itself by the stiff pointed tail-feathers, his head just level
with the orifice opening into the nesting-hole, often uttering
his plaintive cry. The female would now and again come up
and greet him by putting out her bill through the opening
hole. Unfortunately the orchard became the scene of carpet-
beating operations, which disturbed the Woodpeckers, and
in the intervals of absence a pair of Starlings commenced
an attack, and by rapidly throwing in bits of foreign material,
made the hole untenantable for the Woodpeckers, who
consequently deserted it. The late Professor Newton, in the
“History of British Birds” (Vol. II., p. 458), remarks in a
footnote that “‘ Selby says he had repeatedly seen it descend
trees by moving backward. The editor has not been so
fortunate, though he thinks he must have enjoyed more
frequent opportunities of observing the bird.” I can confirm
this statement of Selby; the male bird of the pair I allude to
searched the bark of the decaying cherry tree in which the
hole was placed, with great assiduity. On reaching a sufficient
elevation it would descend backward with as great rapidity
as in its ascension. I was so close to the birds on many
occasions, that with the aid of glasses, I saw that during the
backward descent the points of the tail-feathers were kept
about an inch off the bark of the tree, though the tail and.
back retained the curve, associated with the ascending bird.
H. W. FEILDEN.
MARSH-HARRIERS IN NORFOLK.
Durine a short stay in “ Broad-land” recently I had the
good fortune to have under observation for some considerable
time first a single specimen, and a day or two later a pair,
94. BRITISH BIRDS.
of that handsome bird the Marsh-Harrier (Circus wruginosus).
I shall never forget the majestic wheeling flight of these birds
as they quartered the ground in search of prey. The exact
locality it will perhaps not be wise to name for the present,
but of the identity of the birds there can be no doubt.
W. P. PycraArt.
DUCKS’ EGGS AND DOWN.
I HAVE read with considerable interest Mr. Noble’s article
on Ducks in the June issue of BririsH Brrps. In the main
I am in entire agreement with his remarks, especially as regards
the futility of attempting to identify by the down alone.
I take slight exception, however, to his remarks on the
Gadwall. I have observed, perhaps, a dozen nests of this
species in Norfolk, and in two cases at least there are numerous
white feathers which are indistinguishable from those of
the Wigeon, and which, in conjunction with precisely similar
down and precisely similar eggs, render identification
extremely difficult.
I have seen the cream-coloured variety in eggs of the Pintail,
but I wonder if Mr. Noble has come across the variety where
the eggs are as vivid a green as those of the Golden-eye. As
regards downless Pochards’ and Mallards’ nests, my experience
of the former is small, being confined to one locality, where
the nests are always floating structures, and down is not
abundant, but I have found, perhaps, half-a-dozen Mallards’
nests built close to water, and amongst thick sedge, which were
without a particle of down.
NorMAN GILROY.
[The Editors have kindly allowed me a view of the above
note from Mr. Norman Gilroy. Doubtless the number of
proprietors over whose estates Mr. Gilroy has leave to prosecute
his investigations is larger than those who have extended a
like permission to myself; in any case, I cannot lay claim
to having examined so many nests of the Gadwall as Mr.
Gilroy has. I have seen white feathers in Gadwalls’ nests,
but in my opinion they are not typical, and as the object of
the article was identification, they were excluded. I have
not yet seen a nest containing only white feathers, and were I
to find such a nest, I should consider it necessary to procure
the female bird before identification could be established.
Some of the patterned feathers have always been present in
the nests I have examined, and it is these feathers which give
the key to the solution—HratLEey NOBLE. |
NOTES. 95
INLAND NESTING OF THE SHELD-DUCK, AND
NESTING OF POCHARD, SHOVELER AND TEAL
IN LINCOLNSHIRE.
In answer to Mr. Southwell’s question about the Sheld-Ducks
on Twig Moor, Lincolnshire (supra, p. 62), I may say with
confidence that the birds breed there. On May 22nd, 1907,
I saw five or six pairs there, evidently breeding ; and again
on June 2nd, 1908, several birds were on the ponds, and a
brood of ducklings had just been hatched off. The Sheld-Duck
has also nested on the Gull-ponds on Scotton Common, six
miles south-west of Twig Moor, and a pair or two perhaps do
so every year. I have seen young in all stages there, and on
June 22nd, 1903, there was a brood only a few days old, some
of which I managed to catch in my hands, but quickly released.
This species is very common on the Somerset coast, near
Burnham and Weston-super-Mare; in winter I have seen
more than five hundred on the sea in one flock, and hundreds
nest among the sand dunes in the neighbourhood. The water-
bailiff of Blagdon Reservoir, about ten miles from the
Somerset coast, states that a pair remained to nest there a
few years ago. He is a most intelligent observer, and is not
likely to have been mistaken. I may mention also that
several pairs of Pochards breed on the Twig Moor Gull-ponds,
and I saw quite young broods both in 1907 and 1908. A
good number of Teal and Shovelers breed on Scotton Common,
a fact which I can state from personal observation, having
found their nests and seen their young broods there on several
occasions during the last few years.
F. L. Buatuwayt.
[Mr. Clifford Borrer has also written to us to the same effect
as the above.—EDs. |
NESTING OF THE SHOVELER IN STAFFORDSHIRE.
Earzy in April, 1908, Mr. R. C. Thomas, of Bloxwich, told
me that some Shovelers (Spatula clypeata) (at first two
drakes and a duck) were on a “‘ swag ’’—a piece of water
formed by subsidence of land caused by mining operations—
at one of their collieries. The one on which the Shovelers
were seen is about an acre in extent, and is adjacent to a
coal-pit, which is not now worked. On May 12th Mr. Thomas
found the nest, which then contained six eggs, built in a
depression, about fifty yards from the “swag.” When on
the nest the duck drew towards herself the tall grasses growing
near, and thus formed a kind of canopy, a small opening being
left at the side nearest the water. There is a footpath near,
96 BRITISH BIRDS.
and, at this time, she took no notice of anyone passing by
unless they stopped to look at her, when she hurriedly left
the nest, ran a few yards, and took flight to the “ swag.”
On May 17th the clutch of ten eggs was completed, and on
May 28th I accompanied Mr. Thomas to see the b rds and their
nest. As we approached the place my friends told me that
it was uncertain whether we should see the drake, as he some-
times disappeared for a whole day; however, to our great
delight, we found the beautiful bird on the water. We had
cautiously approached within some forty yards, when he
rose and flew behind the “ pit-bank ” at the south side of the
“swag.” Our attention was next directed to the duck,
which hastily took to flight when we were within a yard of
the nest. The grass had grown very much and now completely
hid it. There were ten eggs—of a greenish-cream colour,
much soiled—laid on dried grasses and down, and not
covered—perhaps owing to our arrival at the nest being rather
sudden. We then walked on to another “swag,” nearly three
acres in extent, and about five hundred yards away. Here men
were loading coal from “ pit-tubs”’ into carts, on a wharf,
close to which, in company with a number of domestic ducks,
were the Shovelers. Although they had apparently taken no
notice of the men who were at work, on our arrival they
instantly took flight, fortunately only to the other side of
the “swag.” Very quietly we walked to the shelter of a tree,
from which we watched the birds for a considerable time, during
which they left the water and preened their feathers on the
opposite bank.
On June 9th the ten eggs hatched out safely, after an in-
cubation of twenty-four days, and the same day a second
drake put in an appearance, but, after a fight, was driven off.
The Rev. F. C. R. Jourdain, whom I told of this occur-
rence, informs me that a pair of Shovelers had bred at Wyrley
Grove, which is two miles from the locality of the nest I have
described, in 1906 and 1907; from inquiries I have since
made I find there has not been a nest there this year.
The best thanks of Staffordshire ornithologists are due to
the Messrs. Thomas, who were draining the “swag” when
the Shovelers were first noticed, and who instantly stopped
operations when they found that they were nesting. They
have since taken every precaution that the birds should not
be disturbed.
W. WELLS BLADEN.
POCHARD NESTING IN SOUTH-WEST KENT.
On May 16th I was punting with a friend in Romney Marsh
NOTES. 97
along a wide dyke, which ran along one side of a bed of high
reeds. On nearing anangle of the reed bed I noticed a female
Pochard (Fuligula ferina) swimming hurriedly away as if
she had just left her nest. I got out of the punt and searched
the corner of the reed bed, when I very soon discovered the
nest containing seven young Pochards, just hatched, one
duckling being not yet dry. While examining and trying
to photograph the nest the duck flew round quite close, so I
was certain of her identity. The nest was about eighteen inches
high, composed of pieces of dry reed, and had practically
no down or feathers in it; in fact, except for the ducklings
and the broken eggshells, one might have supposed that the
nest was that of a Coot.
R. Sparrow.
UNUSUAL NESTING SITES AND INCUBATION PERIOD
OF THE TUFTED DUCK.
On June 17th, 1908, I found on a small island rock a nest of
a Tufted Duck (Fuligula cristata) in a water-worn crevice,
having cover from all sides except the south, with an over-
hanging rock giving partial cover from above. The nest was
made of dry rush, grass, moss, and a few green fern leaves ;
there were five eggs, on which the bird was sitting, but there
was little, if any, down.
On June 20th, 1908, on a wooded island, I found a Tufted
Duck’s nest among bushes, with a dead branch overhanging
one side of it. South-west of it was a rock ; north of it a large
stone ; east of it a small stone; to the south of it a sallagh,
probably Salix caprea. ‘The floor of the nest was made of
dead leaves, the sides of it were almost entirely of down, with
a very few dead leaves and small dead twigs, and the occur-
rence of these two latter may have been accidental. As at
the bottom of the nest there was the skin of an egg, it seems
probable the site had been used before. There were ten eggs.
I have by no means infrequently found the nest of this species
under bushes, but I do not remember one placed as this one
was, right inside a covert.
There is no doubt birds adapt themselves to their surround-
ings, but it seems curious that they should select an unusual
site without immediately at hand the usual materials for a.’
nest, when plenty of such ground is to be found close by.
On May 29th last on a lake island in Ireland I found a
nest of the Tufted Duck with eight eggs. I am all but certain
I put the bird off it, but the one egg I took from the nest
when blown showed no trace of incubation. I replaced, within
98 BRITISH BIRDS.
a few minutes, this egg with one of a domestic Duck. At
some time subsequent. to this, and prior to June 22nd, I
visited the nest and found her sitting on eight eggs, 7.e., seven
of her own and the one of the domestic Duck. On July Ist
my boatman visited the nest and found her sitting on five
eggs only, z.e., two of her own had gone as also the one of the
tame Duck. On July 5th, on visiting the nest, he found the
eggs had hatched out. Needless to say, I do not consider
these observations by any means crucial, but the evidence,
such as it is, points in the direction of the incubation period
of the Tufted Duck being more than twenty-three days.
On June 16th, on a small lake island, I found a Tufted
Duck’s nest with sixteen eggs. One egg was on the top of the
other fifteen, they were warm and evidently being incubated.
H. TREVELYAN.
TEAL AND PHEASANT LAYING IN THE SAME NEST.
I mer with rather a curious case of a mixed clutch of eggs a
few days ago which may be worth recording, viz., a nest
with both Teal’s and Pheasant’s eggs. Both birds laid in one
nest, but when I saw it the Teal was in possession, sitting
very close. CHARLES E. PEARSON.
[A number of records show that in the case of Game-birds
and Ducks “joint”? clutches of eggs are by no means rare.—
H. F.W.]
PALLAS’S SAND-GROUSE IN ENGLAND.
AN invasion of Pallas’s Sand-Grouse (Syrrhaptes paradoxus)
into this country was not unexpected since the bird appeared
numerously in European Russia in the latter half of April,
and has been reported from several parts of Germany
(cf. Orn. Monats., 1908, pp. 100 and 132). The following
have been reported in England :—Yorkshire-——Three flying
high between Burley and Ilkley on May 20th (“‘ Lichen Grey,”
Country Life, 13, v1., 08). Hampshire.—Five, said to be of
this species, were seen near East Liss about the middle of
April (“ M.I.,” Feld, 20, v1.,08). Five were clearly identified
by Mr. A. O. Lyon, near Burley, New Forest, early in August
(in litt.). Two were seen flying N.E. over Havant on July 8th
(B. Roper, t.c., 18, vu. 08). Berkshire.-—One was picked up
near the River Kennet on June 6th (H. D. Astley, t.c., 20,
vu., O08). Hssex—A pair was seen several times near
Southend-on-Sea in the last week of June (J. Seabrooke,
t.c., 4, vir., 08). Surrey.—Three were observed at Holmwood
on June 28th (L. Mortimer, l.c.). Norfolk.—Two were seen
at Brancaster on June 28th (F. H. Partridge, /.c.).—H. F. W.
NOTES. 99
BLACK-TAILED GODWIT AND SPOTTED REDSHANK
IN KENT.
On May 12th last I was walking alongside a “fleet” in
Romney Marsh when a bird which was strange to me rose from
the edge of some shallow water. I at once got my binoculars
on to it, and by the long straight bill, white wing-bar and white
rump and light brown back, I identified it as a Black-tailed
Godwit (Limosa belgica), and from its size I should say it
was a female. It flew some distance, and I thought I had
marked it down, but on going to the spot I failed to flush it
again. On the 16th I visited the same ground, but did not
see the Godwit, so it had evidently continued its migration.
The same evening my attention was called to a strange bird
flying overhead by hearing a whistle something like that of
a Redshank. For a moment [thought it was a Golden Plover
with black breast, but on looking at it through my glasses, I
noticed it flew very like a Common Redshank, and had a beak
as long as a Redshank, and was black all over, with white
speckles. I at once decided it was a male Spotted Redshank
(Totanus fuscus) on migration.
R. SPARROW.
CHANGE OF NESTING SITES THROUGH HUMAN
INFLUENCE.
Last January the Black-headed Gull was removed from the
list of egg-protected birds. As a consequence its regular
nesting-places were raided by collectors of eggs for local
consumption, or for despatch to London as Plovers’ eggs,
and the result was that the birds, seeking fresh quarters,
formed two new colonies on Wedholme Flow and Rockliffe
Marsh, near Carlisle. The Redshank has been subjected to
similar persecution. At one time the commonest of our
shore-birds, its numbers suffered such depletion that it was
put on the list of egg-protected birds by the Cumberland
County Council. On the marshes in North Lancashire its
egos have been largely gathered for substitution as Plovers’
eggs in the metropolitan market, and the result has been a
notable exodus of the birds to the Yorkshire dales for security,
In the neighbourhood of Bentham, as Mr. Murdoch, a capable
naturalist, reports, Redshanks have been nesting freely, and
in a Yorkshire dale several miles further inland I have noticed
a remarkable development. With the sequestered and
beautiful dale named Kingsdale, I have been familiar from
boyhood, and have fished its trout stream for more than fifty
years. I can vouch for it that such a bird as a Redshank
100 BRITISH BIRDS.
was never seen in that dale until very recent years. Five
years ago there was, to my surprise, a pair of the birds;
at the beginning of June this year Redshanks were so
numerous and noisy as to produce the illusion that I was
on a Cumberland marsh. The addition to the avian life
of the dale was very pleasing.
T. Harrison.
* *
LesseR ReppPott Nesting In Mippuesex.—Lt.-Col. H.
Meyrick records that he has found two nests of the Lesser
Redpoll (Linota rufescens) on Hampstead Heath this year,
and that he suspected them of breeding there last year (Zool.,
1908, p. 227).
LirrLE Ow. IN WILTSHIRE.—An example of Athene noctua
was shot near Avebury in November, 1907, and is now in the
Marlborough College Museum (Rep. Marl. Coll. N.H. Soc.,
1908, p. 76). This may be a forerunner of a still greater
extension of this bird in a south-westerly direction from
Lilford than has yet been traced (cf. ante, Vol. I., p. 335
et seq.), or it may have been liberated locally. The members
of the College Natural History Society would do well to make
a search for the Little Owl in the neighbourhood.
Scops OwL IN CUMBERLAND.—A specimen of a Scops Owl
(Scops giu) is reported by Mr. P. W. Parkin (in whose
possession the bird is) to have been shot on November 6th,
1907, at Broomrigg, near Armathwaite, by Captain W. H.
Parkin (Field, 13, vi., 08, p. 982).
BITTERN IN YORKSHIRE.—A Common Bittern (Botaurus
stellaris) was seen by the watcher at Kilnsea, Holderness,
Yorkshire, on May 6th last (R. Fortune, Nat., 1908, p. 202).
GADWALL IN SOMERSET.—A male was shot near Bridgwater
on February 10th, 1908 (H. Whistler, Field, 20, v1., 08,p. 1030).
Woop - Picton Nesting oN A Hovse.—TIwo Wood-
Pigeons are said by Mr. F. Mansell to have nested and reared
their young on a window-sill in Highbury this year (Field,
20, vi., 08, p. 1030).
IncREASE OF TERNS NestTING In IRELAND.—Mr. A.
Williams writes to the “ Irish Naturalist ”’ (1908, pp. 119-122)
that protection has greatly increased the Gulls and Terns in
co. Dublin. At Malahide Island the numbers of Common
and Arctic Terns nesting is described as being incalculable.
This colony a few years ago numbered only a couple of pairs.
A rough idea of the number of birds at the present time is
given by the fact that Mr. Williams counted 211 nests, but
his search was by no means exhaustive.
Vol. IL
4 1908. No. 4.
i Mogmuly oe sme ‘NET
__ "396HIGIHOLBORNICNDON
1 “1 . 7 ~}
et ‘ i PA! Bind Poke
=e 4 ‘ oT | {3 RECA Se
_ EGGS OF PALAARCTIC BIRDS.
A Work on this subject, ‘illustrated with BEAUTIFULLY. Tee |
| COLOURED PLATES, is now being sprig en |
_ Write nie Fult Prospectus and a Part ‘fie inspection to
WILLIAMS & NORGATE,
44, Henrietta Street, Covent Garden, London, W. Gu
~~ DALLMEYER'S
Natu ralists’ Camera,
-4907- MODEL,
For thas ih or Oninaly LENSES. oe |
a
DALLMEYER'S.
Lenses are wel ac!
by the test
ee skilled Bird ‘ i We
eat caes Bec
——
The fllviher are. :
specially recowtneniteds 1
THE STIGMATIC SERIES. ll. F/6 (Convertible)
THE SERIES ‘D PATENT PORTRAIT LENSES F 6..
(A Rapid Long Focus Lens at a Moderate Price.)
“High or Moderate Power Telephoto Lenses (Original Make). ees
We are Specialists in Cameras and Apparatus jor Photo Orit : ao |
CATALOGUES AND ADVICE FREE.
J, H. DALLMEYER, Limen, DENZIL AD,
Showrooms: 25, NEWMAN sm, Ww. “NEASDEN, LONDON, Nike
WATKINS. & DONCASTER,
Waturalists,
And. Manufacturers of CABINETS and APPARATUS for Entomataey: Birds! Fag
and ‘Skins, and all Branches. of Natural History.
A LARGE STOCK OF INSECTS, end: BIRDS’ EGGS. ene SKINS. _ oe
Speciality :—Obiects for Nature Study, Drawing Classes, &c.
BIRDS, MAMMALS, ae. PRESERVED and MOUNTED by FIRST-CLASS WORKMEN re
TRUE TO NATURE. phge D iy
All Books and Publications on Natural History’ supplied.
36, STRAND, LONDON, W.C. (five Doors: from hcg Gry)
Catalogue (ro2 PP) post Sree hy
ey ee
*,
* Xe =
"
£
r
i
&
—~
W Oo & +
Se ge 5 :
eS eG eee
e < 3 Be ae ES 3 :
Sek gt Ae a3 8 2 |B
2 hee, .. i oi
o z as < E
ie nH § :
¢ Rx aS x =
= oe 5
©
ii — =a ( WEE;
=a ir W<«K KK (it
. ITO Kua QQ \ \
SSesltz
"4 oe \ cute)
a Nea nC a rll ttiert Saute eet MUAY a et MIN \
“ae . 5 e a. ee co Ss LQ RA ak So 3
= : SEES ul at er
et
“AND PROTECT
WILD BIRDS.
_4.By MARTIN HIESEMANN.
With an Introduction by
Her Grace the DUCHESS of BEDFORD
Many Illustrations. Stiff Boards, 1s. 6d. net.
NESTING | Nesting Boxes |
TO ALL LOVERS OF WILD BIRDS
c ens ainox | THIS BOOK WILL APPEAL.
-@ It is a practical guide for all who wish to attract the birds
to their doors and induce them to nest in their gardens,
whether large or small. 3 oy
ie q It shows that these birds are most useful in keeping down
the insect pests which are so harmful to trees and shrubs.
_ @ In this connection also the attention of Municipal and Urban
- Councils may be drawn to the advantages which would |
| accrue to trees and plants from the use of nesting a 2
for birds in Public Parks and open spaces. ¢:
_ @ The methods described are simple but efficient, They are
’ the outcome of a lifetime of study and experiment by one
‘? of the greatest of bird-lovers—the Baron von Berlepsch.
died orgs
London: WITHERBY & CO., 326, High Holeti,
sh AND OF ALL BOOKSELLERS.
LAS
ar]
3
i |
3 : €
ae
is
G'S
58
ba)
mn
ies
Bes
2
(uewy4ly ‘g ‘yf Aq paydessojoyd)
“HSUV], AUNWOY “LSHN' SLI NO NUAT, WILL T
'€ ‘Id “1 19A “Sda/d HSILIAd
DRHEHBIRDS
SorrrED GY" HH: F. WITHERBY, F.Z.5.; M.B.0.U.
ASSISTED BY W. P. PYCRAFT, A.LS., M.B.0.U.
ConTENTS OF NuMBER 4, Vou. II. SrpremBer 1, 1908.
Variation in the Nests of the Arctic and Common Terns,
by F. B. Kirkman, B.A., Oxon. ee Ill.) (Continued
from page 82) ais «Page: 101
Some Early British Geniwelogists amd eis works: by
W. H. Mullens, m.a., LL.M., M.B.0.U. IIL. —Christopher
Merrett (16141695) is 109
Bird Roosts and Routes, by Bruce F. Giiminge ae 119
On the More Important Additions to our Knowledge of
British Birds since 1899, by H. F. Witherby and N. F.
Ticehurst. Part XIII. (continued from page 87) a 125
Notes :—Pied Wagtail Rearing Three Broods (E. G. B. Meade-
Waldo). On the British Bullfinch (Dr. Ernst Hartert):
How a Cuckoo Deposited her Egg (Owen Ephraim).
Tufted Duck in Scotland (Wm. Eagle Clarke). Stark’s
Record of the Breeding of the Scaup-Duck at Loch
Leven (William Evans). The Distribution of the
Common Scoter in Scotland (J. A. Harvie-Brown).
Pallas’s Sand-Grouse in Yorkshire and Kent (T. H.
Nelson, H. G. Alexander). Green-Backed Gallinule in
Norfolk (Rev. M. C. H. Bird). Abnormal Eggs of the
Ringed Plover (Major H. Trevelyan). Pebble Nest of
a Ringed Plover (Com. H. Lynes, R.N.). Lapwing’s
Nest with Five Eggs (Col. R. H. Rattray). Solitary
Sandpiper and other Waders in Kent (The Duchess of
Bedford). A Hitherto Unrecorded Specimen of the
Levantine Shearwater from Kent (N. F. Ticehurst), ete. 130
VARIATION IN THE NESTS OF THE ARCTIC
AND COMMON TERNS.
BY
F. B. KIRKMAN, B.aA., oxon.
(erary LIT.)
(Continued from page 82.)
At Romney Marsh I examined this summer (1908)
fifteen Common Terns’ nests. Of these twelve were in
the shingle, and three on soil among herbage ; one made
of lichen and grass was shaded by a foxglove, and em-
bowered in white campion—a charming picture. Only
102 BRITISH BIRDS.
one, lying in the shingle, was without lining of any sort. _
The material used in the case of the others consisted of
small twigs, chiefly broom, coarse stems, dry grass and
lichen. By using one of these materials, or combining
two or three, the fourteen birds in question managed
to produce seven variations, of which one is shown in
Fig. 8. This species, also, according to Mr. Kearton, lays
its eggs on bare rock. As in the case of the Arctic
Fic. 6.—Arctic Tern’s Nest, with Pebbles and Bent.
Terns, no definite relation between site and material could
be traced.
A word about the Little Tern. The late Howard
Saunders stated that it uses no material for its nest. Mr.
Fred. Austen, the watcher at Romney Marsh, endorses
this, adding that the hen alone constructs the nest, which
she does by the simple process of working her body round
and round in the pebbles, much like a dog preparing
its bed for a nap. But the late H. A. Macpherson des-
cribes two nests (t.c., p. 418) one lined with “‘ dry stems of
¥F.B. KIRKMAN: VARIATION IN NESTS OF TERNS. 103
grass,’ the other with “ fine pebbles.”’ While no doubt
the species generally dispenses with a lining (Fig. 7),
further observation may show that variations are not
infrequent. One may note in passing that the preference
of the Little Tern for unlined nests may possibly account
for the comparative scarcity of this species.
Let us turn now to consider the bearing of the above
facts, beginning with the variation in sites. It seems
reasonable to assume that if there is any truth in the theory
of protective coloration the normal (7.e., the safest)
nesting site of the Arctic and Common Tern, and, indeed,
of all the grey and white Terns and Gulls, is the closely
packed shingle such as one finds on the beach or the vast
stretches of Romney Marsh. Sitting amid the vague
outlines of black, white, and grey stones, a Tern is prac-
tically invisible. Something of this correspondence of
colour is visible in Plate III, There is no reason to think
that the invisibility is necessary to the safety of the
Tern itself, for it is the last bird to be caught napping
on its nest. But its advantage as a means of protecting
eggs and young from discovery is obvious.
By placing its eggs among herbage, on the bare sand
patches, on rocks, or even in the shingle beds among the
sandhills, where the stones are seldom closely packed
(Fig. 6), the Tern sacrifices all the advantages to be
derived from its coloration. In such sites it is a con-
spicuous object. That it should be able to effect the
change with comparative impunity seems to argue that
the species has no longer many egg-stealing foes to fear.
Under any circumstances it would require a bird of no
mean courage or strength to pillage the nests of Terns,
for they have an unpleasant habit of descending almost
vertically, with the velocity of a bolt, upon unwelcome
intruders, and striking with the beak. At Walney
the young Black-headed Gulls, whose mottled brown
plumage evidently caused their identity to be mistaken,
suffered severely from this practice, often being struck
down in mid-flight, and the more easily as they were
104 BRITISH BIRDS.
ignorant of the Corvine device of turning bodily in the
air and presenting beak and claws to an assailant from
above. Howard Saunders records that a flock of
Arctic Terns ‘‘has been seen to mob and drown a
Hooded Crow.” On the other hand, it is stated that
in the Farne Islands, a Greater Black-backed Gull
forced to keep on the ground by a broken wing, relieved
the monotony of its existence by prolonged feasting upon
eal Mais
Fic. 7.—Lesser Tern’s Nest in Shingle at Romney Marsh.
the eggs and young of the large colony of Arctic Terns.
A mile off one could see the whirling canopy of white
wings that marked the spots where the invalid paused
for refreshments. No doubt a Raven could also exact
heavy toll. But these and other targe egg-eaters are
now no longer common.
The Arctic Terns of Walney were, however, far from
effecting with impunity the change from the normal
site. Though they shifted their nesting grounds at least
—
F.B. KIRKMAN: VARIATION IN NESTS OF TERNS. 105
once, and though they continued laying and re-laying
up to the middle of July, it is doubtful whether they
hatched out more than a dozen chicks. An almost clean
sweep was made of the eggs, the marauder being no other
than the humble rat. Traces of these creatures’ feet and
tails were to be seen leading from nearly every nest to
the nearest tuft of bent, where the broken shells of the
eggs told the story of the theft. The deep narrow furrow
made in each case by the tail in the sand seemed to show
that the rat had used this appendage as a support while
it hopped along on its hind legs with the eggs clasped in
loving fashion to its breast. That it escaped being
murdered by the parents is remarkable.
If the Terns had nested in the packed shingle of the
beach would their eggs have escaped the rats? Arguing
a prior? it is at least clear that they would have been much
more difficult to locate. Perhaps some other observer
ean throw light on this point.
So far I have shown, or attempted to show, that the
Arctic Terns are quitting the safer shingle site for others
more exposed. I suggest that this has been done with
comparative impunity (assuming the rat ravages to be
exceptional) owing to the greater scarcity of enemies
powerful enough to take advantage of the new conditions.
The same applies to a number of other sea-birds. Indeed,
it is more than likely that the extermination of the larger
birds of prey helps to explain much that is anomalous
in the habits of British birds. But to show that the
absence of enemies has rendered the change possible is
not to explain why it took place. It may be that, owing
to the spread of vegetation, or the invasion of sand, it
is the nesting sites that are altering their character, and
not the birds their choice. But this is mere conjecture.
When we quit the subject of variation in site for that
of nesting material, we find ourselves face to face with
the two questions already put by Mr. Pycraft in respect
to the Ringed Plover, the first being: How comes it
about that certain individuals of the species provide
106 BRITISH BIRDS.
their nests with a lining when other individuals dispense
with it altogether? The explanation may lie in the
undoubted capacity for imitation that birds possess.
This would account for the presence of a lining where it
was superfluous, or where, as has been shown to be
frequently the case, it is too rudimentary to be of the
least use. Imitation, even among human beings, is often
quite unintelligent. Or it may be due to a tendency
Fic. 8.—Common Tern’s Nest of Broom at Romney Marsh.
inherited from some remote ancestor living under different
conditions. Before, however, we can balance probabilities,
we must decide whether the lined nests are to be regarded
as the beginning of an advance, or as a survival, persisting
not by virtue of necessity, but simply because it is
harmless. The first step towards a solution is to find
out whether the mortality among the chicks before or
immediately after quitting the egg-shells is due to the
absence or presence of a lining.
The second question may be stated thus: How comes
F.B. KIRKMAN: VARIATION IN NESTS OF TERNS. 107
it that those individuals of the species which line their
nests differ in their choice of material? Let us note that
this choice is limited by two conditions, the most obvious
being the accessibility of the material. But though
accessibility limits choice, it does not necessarily determine
its direction. The material of the Terns’ nest above
described was equally accessible to all. A more striking
illustration is, however, provided by the following details
of the material used in six Thrushes’ nests, all built in
gorse bushes within fifty yards of one another, one only
being old: (1) gorse; (2) an old nest of grass, with a
small amount of gorse and twigs, and one bit of wool ;
(3) grass, moss, stalks ; (4) grass, moss, bracken ; (5) grass,
a little wool ; (6) grass, moss, hairs. Obviously, the most
accessible material for all was gorse, yet this was utilised
by not more than two.
The choice of materials in the Terns’ nests described
appears to have been limited only by accessibility, but
in the vast majority of cases, if not in all, there is a
second quite distinct limiting condition which may briefly
be called the law of species. For instance, the Thrush,
though using a wide variety of materials in the normal
construction of the outside of its nest, appears to be
debarred from using twigs only. The material of the
inside lining is subjected to still greater restrictions,
being confined, ‘“‘ freak”? nests apart, to dung or mud
studded with bits of rotten wood. This limitation is,
no doubt, to be explained, as Mr. Alfred Russel Wallace
has pointed out, by some peculiarity in the structure or
habits, past or present, of the species. It would be
interesting to know what this is in the case of the Thrush.
What led it to scorn the Blackbird’s addition of grass,
or the wool, hair, feathers, used by other species? Put
more generally, the question is one of the origin of
specific as distinct from individual variations.
Within the limits thus imposed upon it by accessibility
and the law of the species, why does one individual select,
say, twigs, another pebbles? It may be that the young
108 BRITISH BIRDS.
bird constructing its first nest takes the first “lawful ”
material that accident places in its way, and so contracts
the beginning of a habit that leads it to use normally the
same material in the construction of all subsequent nests,
even though the search for it demands much more time
and labour than taking any other “lawful” material
that happens to be near the adopted site. This theory,
which would apply equally to cases in which both sexes
took part in building, is at first sight plausible enough.
It depends, however, upon a question of fact. It should
not be difficult either by marking birds or watching their
behaviour in captivity to find out whether they tend to
continue the use of nesting material once adopted.
Perhaps someone already has the facts. If so, let him
write and deliver.
Facts it is that are wanted, and as far as nests are
concerned, it should not be difficult to collect a large
number. Those who are prepared to co-operate in this
work will at least have the satisfaction of feeling that
their time is being put to good use. The question of
variation, specific or individual, structural or functional,
occupies to-day a place in the foremost rank of scientific
problems, because it takes us to the roots of the evolution
theory. It has no mere academic importance. Human
progress depends upon human control of natural forces.
There can be no control of these forces except by under- .
standing the laws that govern their operations. And
these laws can be reached only through a persevering
accumulation of seemingly trivial facts. Jf there is one
thing that Darwin, Wallace, and their successors have
made clear, it is the immeasurable importance of the
unimportant. They have shown us that from the spectacle
of the humble Thrush collecting a beakful of rotten wood
for its nest there is but one step to the brink of the un-
plumbed depths that hide the answer to the riddle of
the universe.
"109"
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS
AND THEIR WORKS.
BY
Wa HH, MULGLHNS, m.A., olism.) MLB OU.
I.—CHRISTOPHER MERRETT
(1614—1695).
THE first printed list of British Birds is that contained in the
‘“Pinax Rerum . . . Britannicarum”’ of Christopher Merrett,
or Merret. This small 8vo work was published in London in
1666, and was, as its name denotes (Pinaz = a list, or index)
an attempt on Merrett’s part to catalogue the vegetables,
animals, and minerals, of Great Britain. Of the 223 pages
of which the book consists, 165 are devoted to botany, 42 to
zoology, and the remainder to minerals. In making his
list Merrett was content, at any rate as regards the birds,
to do little more than enumerate those which he considered
he had identified from the descriptions of Ulyses Aldrovandus,
whose twelve books on birds, largely founded on the work
of Gesner, appeared between 1599 and 1603, and of Johannes
Jonstonus, a Scotsman by descent, but by birth a Pole, the
first edition of whose “‘ History of Birds” appeared in 1650.*
The English names are added in many cases, but the few short
notes are rarely original, and Merrett does not seem up to this
time to have devoted much personal attention to the observa-
tion or study of birds; indeed, the chief object of his book
was to replace the “‘ Phytologia’’ (London, 1 vol., 8vo) of
William Howe (1620-1656) a ‘“‘ Flora”? which had appeared
* Merrett’s references to Gesner and Belon, both, as authors, far
more accurate than the two above-mentioned, are, unfortunately,
but few.
110 BRITISH BIRDS.
in 1650, and speedily passed out of print. Meagre and im-
perfect as Merrett’s efforts must now appear, his work was
at any rate the first of its kind, and was held in high estimation
by his contemporaries. Sir Thomas Browne (1605-1682),
the celebrated author of the “ Religio Medici,’ with whom
Merrett had entered into correspondence when he was
contemplating a new and enlarged edition of the “ Pinax,”
thus writes :—
* July 13th, 1668.
‘To Dr. Meret.
‘‘most honoured Sir,—I take ye boldnesse to salute you
as a person of singular worth and learning and whom I very
much respect and honour. ...I should be very glad to
serve you by any observations of mine against yr. second
edition of your Pinax which I cannot sufficiently commende.”
(cf. Southwell’s Notes and Letters on the Natural History of
Norfolk, etc.” London, 1902. 1 vol., 8vo, p. 57).
Dr. John Fleming, the author of “A History of British
Animals ” (Edinburgh, 1828, 1 vol., 8vo) also appreciates the
‘* Pinax,”’ and describes it as ‘“‘ This small work, which, though it
claims little more than the merit of a catalogue, exhibits many
proofs of great diligence, and rises in importance, when viewed
as a first attempt at the construction of a British Fauna,”
a far juster criticism than Pulteney’s (Richard Pulteney,
1730-1801, author of “‘ Historical Sketches of the Progress
of Botany,” 1790) that it was ‘“‘ extremely superficial.”
As regards the book itself, a facsimile of the title page of
the first edition (1 Vol., small 8vo) is here given.
The Collation is:—pp. 2, Title & Imprimatur, + pp. 7,
Epist. Dedicat. + pp. 21, Epist. ad Lect., + pp. 231 + p. 1.
This edition (of 1666) is very rare, many copies having
presumably been destroyed in the Great Fire of London of that
same year, either at the printer’s or at Merrett’s house.
In the next year, 1667, there appeared two editions, or
re-issues of the “ Pinax,” similar in contents to the original,
but with different title pages, as below, one entitled ‘‘ Editio
Secunda,”’ as follows :—
Pe eN A
Rerum Naturalium
BRITANNICARUM,
CONTINENS
VeGETABILIA, ANIMALIA
ET
voces tr i A:
In hac infula repperta in-
choatus.
AUTHORE
Chri fepboro Merrett
Mediems Doétore utriufque Societatis Regiz
Socio primoque Mufzi Harveani cuftode.
Mn To dye MMOUVov AAG
€Py@ ATL void Secs TSS (nTedS.
Hipp.
Londini Impenfis Cave Palleys ad Infigne Rofe
in Cameterio Divi Paul, Typis F.&
T.Warren, Anno 1666.
112 BRITISH BIRDS.
Pinax / Rerum Naturalium / Britannicarum, / continens /
Vegetabilia, Animalia, / et / Fossilia, / In hac Insula reperta
inchoatus / Editio Secunda. / Auctore / Christophoro Merrett,/
Medicine Doctore utriusque Societatis / Regize Socio primoque
Musei Har- / veani Custode. / (quotation from Hippocrates)
Londini, / Typis T. Roycroft, Impensis Cave Pulleyn, Prostat
apud / Sam Thomson in vico vulgo dicto Duck lane, 1667. /
1 vol., small 8vo.
Collation: pp. 2, Title & Imprimatur. + pp. 10, Epist.
Dedicat. + pp. 20, Epist. ad Lect. + pp. 223 + p. 1.
The other, a mere reprint of the original edition :—
Pinax / Rerum Naturalium / Britannicarum, / continens /
Vegetabilia, Animalia, / et / Fossilia, / In hac Insula reperta
inchoatus. / Auctore / Christoporo Merrett, / Medicine Doctore
utriusque Societatis / Regiz Socio promoque Muszi Har- /
veani Custode. / (quotation from Hippocrates) Londini, /
Typis T. Roycroft, Impensis Cave Pulleyn. / MDCLXVII.
1 vol., small 8vo. Collation as above.
It will be noticed that the date of this last edition, unlike
that of the first, and the ‘‘ editio secunda,” 1s in Roman, not
Arabic, figures.
(Engelmann gives an Edition of 1704. N.S.) |
Although there appears to be no evidence that Merrett
published any edition of the “ Pinax ” later than 1667, he cer-
tainly contemplated doing so, and in August, 1668, he writes
Sir T. Browne that: “ Besides those mentioned in ye pinax
I have 100 to add & ... I doe entreat this favour off yu
39
to inform me fuller off those unknown things .. .” and in
response to this request Sir Thomas Browne placed at his
disposal the notes which he had prepared “ of many animals
in these parts whereof 3 years agoe a learned gentleman of
this Country wished me to give him some account, which while
I was doing ye gentleman my good friend died.”
Christopher Merrett, who, like so many of the earlier
ornithologists, was by profession a physician, was born at
Winchcomb, in Gloucestershire, on Feb. 16th, 1614. In
1631 he became a member of Gloucester Hall, Oxford, and
removed to Oriel College in 1633. He took his B.A. degree
in 1635, and then, devoting himself to the study of medicine,
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 113
graduated M.B. in 1636, and M.D. in 1643. He afterwards
settled in London, became a Fellow of the Royal College of
Physicians in 1651, and Gulstonian Lecturer in 1654. Through
the influence of his friend, Dr. William Harvey (1578-1657)
Merrett became the first librarian of the College. He resided
at Amen Corner, and is stated by Wood (Athen. Oxon.) to have
acquired a considerable practice. The bulk of the library
belonging to the College, and Merrett’s house were, however,
destroyed in the Great Fire, and Merrett lost his appointment.
He thereupon brought an action against the Royal College
of Physicians, in which he claimed that he was entitled to
his office for life. In this claim he failed, and was ultimately
in 1681 expelled from his Fellowship, nominally for non-
attendance. He died at his house in Hatton Garden, August
19th, 1695, and was buried ‘12 feet deep in the church of
St. Andrew’s, Holborne.”” (Wood.) Merrett was the author
of numerous other works, chiefly on medicine, and he also
contributed several papers on ‘“‘ vegetable physiology ”’ to the
“Philosophical Transactions.” His name is commemorated
in Botany. 8S. F. Gray having in his “‘ Natural Arrangement
of British Plants ” (1821), given the name of Merrettia to a
group of unicellular Alge.
We here print Merrett’s list of birds verbatim, adding, with
the assistance of Mr. W. Warde Fowler, a few short explanatory
notes, which are placed within thick square brackets. The
pages of the original text are enclosed within ordinary square
brackets.
[Page 170] Aves Britannice.
Terrestres Carnivore.
Aquila, the Hagle, I. 10, tab. 1. 2. Ald. 110. G. 149. quandog ;
huc migrat ex Hibernia ubi abundat.
[‘“‘ Migrates out of Ireland where it abounds.” Merrett
has here, as elsewhere, availed himself freely of information
contained in Giraldus Cambrensis’ (1146-1223) “‘ Topography
of Ireland.”’* Giraldus in his ninth chapter, which deals with.
* First printed in 1577 (Anderson).
114 BRITISH BIRDS.
““The Eagle and its Nature,” informs us that “ Eagles are
as numerous here (7.e., in Ireland) as kites are in other
countries.’ ] |
Accipiter, the Hawk, I. 20. tab. 7. Ald. 225. 228. G. 3.
Haliztus, the Sea Hagle, vel Osprey Turn. Quandog ;
conspicitur in Cornubia, I. 12. tab. 2. Ald. 188. 190. G. 177.
‘sine icone.
[The Osprey, cf. Turner (Evans’ edition, pp. 35, 37, 193-195).*
Giraldus seems to have been responsible for the idea, freely
copied by later writers, that “By an extraordinary con-
trivance of sportive nature,one of their feet spreads open,
armed with talons, and adapted for taking their prey, the other
is close, harmless, and only fit for swimming.” Merrett’s
statement that it is seen in Cornwall is, no doubt, taken from
Carew’s “ Survey of Cornwall” (1602, Fol. 35).]
Lanarius, the Lanar, mas vocatur, the Lanaret, Ald. 381.382.
I. 24. tab. 9.—in Shirwood Forest, in agro Notinghamensi,
and in Dean Forest, in agro Glaucestrensi.
[The name “ Lanar”’ has been applied to various species
of Falcons (cf. Newton, Dict. Birds, p. 503). It is doubtful
if Merrett here means Falco lanarius—probably this bird
never bred in the British Isles—but vide Latham’s “ Falconry ”
(1618, Book 11, p. 112), and Hollingshead ‘ Description of
England ” (1577, Ch. V., p. 227) to the contrary.]
Accip. Palumbarius, the Goshawk, mas dicitur the Tassel,
Tertiolus, G. 43.
[The Goshawk, cf. Willughby (p. 85). “ Tassel,” or
Tercel, the term applied by falconers to the male of the
Goshawk and Peregrine.]
Accip. Fringillarius, & Nisus, the Sparrow-Hawk, I. 22.
tab. 8. Ald. 346. 347. G. 44. mas appellatur, the Muschel,
In plerisq ; locis sylvaticis.
[“‘ The male is called Muschel.” The male of the Sparrow-
hawk was termed in falconry the Musket—cf. “ Diary of
Master William Silence” (p. 151), and ‘Merry Wives of
Windsor ” (3.3.21): “‘ How now, my eyas-musket.’’]
Tinnunculus mas & femina, a Stannel, or Stonegall, I.
22. tab. 8. Ald. 358. a Keshrel, or Kastrel, in tractibus Austral.
G. 46.
[‘‘ Stannel”’ = Kestrel, cf. Swainson “ Provincial Names of
British Birds” (p. 140).]
* References to Turner are from Mr. A. H. Evans’ edition. Cam-
bridge. 1903. I vol. 8vo.
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 115
Falco, the Faulcon, I. 30. tab. 12. speciem nescio, in Pem-
brook-shire.
[The figure in Jonstonus is seemingly that of the Peregrine,
cf. Willughby (pp. 76 and 79) for Peregrine.]
Coccyx, Cuculus, the Cuckoe, or Guckoe, I. 24. tab. 10. Ald.
414, 416. sub medium Aprilis nos advolat.
Lanius, the Butcher, or murdering Bird, I. 24. [Page 171.]
tab. 10. Ald. 389. G. 520. vidi juxta Kingsland, zstivo tempore
ter. quaterve. Lanius Cinereus Anglicé, a Skreek, G. 520.
Laniorum duas alias species observavit nobilis vir D.
Willoughby totius nature diligentissimus Callentissimusgq ;
scrutator non solum per Britanniam sed maximam partem
Europe.
[Most probably the Red-backed Shrike, since he saw it in
summer. The two other species of Shrike observed by
Willughby were (1) “The greater Butcher-Bird, or Matta-
gesse, and in the Peak of Derbyshire after the German name
Wierangel, or Werangel, Lanius Cinerus Major”; and (2)
“The Wood-chat, Lanius Minor Cinereo-ruffus,”’ cf. ‘‘ The
Ornithology ” (p. 21).
The word ‘“ Shreek” was applied to the Mistle-Thrush
and also to the Barn-Owl in old English vocabularies of the
eleventh and fifteenth century. Willughby seems to infer
that Turner was responsible for the name Shrike, as applied
to the Butcher-bird, and John Ray, in ‘“ A Collection of
English Words ” (London, 1674, 1 vol., 12mo, p. 83) confirms
this.]
Milvus, the forked tail’d Kite, I. 24. tab. 11. Ald. 395. G.
549. Turn. a Glede, a Puttock.
[Cf. Turner (Evans’ Ed., p. 117) ‘ milvus, in English, a
glede, a puttock, a kyte.” ‘The name “ puttock”’ was also
applied by Willughby to the Buzzard (p. 70).]
Subuteo, the ring-tail’d Kite, I. 24, tab. 9.
[The Ringtail was the old name for the female Hen-Harrier.
Cf. Willughby (p. 21). Merrett seems to have added Kite by
mistake. ]
Buteo Triorchis, the Buzzard, Ald 367.
[Willughby makes the curious statement (p. 21) that
this bird is a great destroyer of conies.]
Peronos, the bald Buzzard, or Kite.
[Turner applies the name “ Bald-Buzzard ”’ to the Marsh-
Harrier, which he says the English call ‘“‘ Balbushard”’ (cf. Evans’
116 BRITISH BIRDS.
Edition, p. 33). Merrett here again wrongly introduces the
word Kite.]
Noctua, the Night, or little grey Owl, I. 48. tab. 18. Ald.
tom. 1. 544. Bubo Turn. a like Fowl.
[Turner says “‘bubo, in English alyke foule” (p. 47).
It is difficult to determine what Owl Merrett here refers to..
Can it be the Little Owl? The Short-eared Owl is called to
this day the “ grey yogle”’ in the Shetlands (cf. Swainson,
p- 129). It is not, however, a night Owl. Charleton in
his ‘‘Onomasticon Zoicon’”’ (1668, p. 70) calls “‘ Noctua ”
“the Common Grey Owl.’’]
Ulula, the white hooping Owl, or Owlet, or Howlet, I. tab. 19.
Ald. 538. G. 700.
[Ulula = the Barn-Owl.]
Strix, the Screech, or Screeching Owl, I. tab. 19. Ald. 563.
[The Screech Owl = the Tawny Owl (cf. Swainson, p. 129.)]
Corvus, the Raven, I. 38. tab. 16, Ald. 694. in ulmetis juxta-
zedes nobilium, G. 294.
Corvus, I. 38. tab. 16. owr common or Carrion Crow, G. 282.
Cornix nigra, Ald. 736. & Cornix simpliciter Turn.
Cornix frugilega, spermologus, a Rook, I. 40. tab. 17. Ald.
tom. 1. 753.
Cornix aquat. Hance videt Turn. apud Morpetenses in ripis
fluminum, G. 293. suspicor esse, the mur Cornubiensium.
[This is the Water-Ouzel, or Dipper. Merrett has been
misled by Turner’s use of the Northumbrian name
‘““ Watercraw’”’ (Evans’ Edition, p. 23), and has placed it
among the Corvide. He has further confused the matter by
suspecting it to be the Cornish “ Mur.” The word “ murre ”
is used in Cornwall to designate the Razor-Bill, called also
the Sea-Crow (cf. Swainson, p. 217).]
Cornix Cinerea, the Royston Crow, I. ubi supra, Ald. 755.
[Formerly also spelt Roiston Crow (cf. Ray, op. cit., p. 83,
and Cotgrave’s Dictionary). Willughby (p. 22) says:
“Common in Cambridgeshire about Newmarket and
Royston.’’]
[Page 172.] Graculus vel Monedula, a Jackdaw, a Chough,
Turn. a Caddo, a Ka, I. 38. tab. 16. Ald. 771. G. 467.
[Jackdaws were sometimes called Choughs (c/. Harting’s
Ornithology of Shakespeare, p. 119).]
Coracias Arist. the Cornish Chough, I. 38. tab. 16. Ald.
768. In omnibus oris maritimis a Cornubia ad Doroberniam.
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 117
[Charleton (op. cit.) says its Cornish name was “the
Killegrew ” (cf. Swainson, p. 74).]
Pica Glandaria, a Jay, I. 40. tab. 17. Ald. 789. Garrulus
avis, G. 634.
Pica, the Magpie, Pyot, Py-anet, I. 40. tab. 17. Pica varia
seu caudata, Ald. tom. I. 85. G. 628.
[Ray (p. 84) has Pianet (cf. Swainson, p. 75).]
Pica Marina, the Sea Pye, I. ut supra Ald. tab. 792. 794.
[The Oyster-Catcher (cf. Turner, Evans’ Edition, p. 199;
and also Swainson, p. 188). The Pica Marina of
Aldrovandus is the Roller (cf. also Willughby, p. 132). Ray
properly places the “‘ Sea-pie’ among the Waders (p. 80).]
Vespertilio, a Bat, Flittermouse, Rearmouse, I. 52. tab.
20. Ald. 574. G. 604. vesperi apparet estate. Hyeme vero
latet in cryptis, & rupibus.
[Merrett, following the example of Gesner,* Belon,t
Aldrovandus,{ Jonstonus,§ and Lovell,|. has placed the
Bat in his list of birds. Charleton follows Merrett, and
Albin as late as 1738 includes the Bat in his “ History of
Birds ” (cf. Linneeus, Fauna Suecica, p. 7). Turner, avoiding
this error, makes no mention of the Bat in his “‘ Avium...
Historia.” Rearmouse = Reremouse, cf. Bartholomew (de
Proprietatibus Rerum, Berthelet’s Edition, 1535, Book XIL.,
Fo. 38), and Shakespeare (M.N.D., II., 2.4.) :-—
“Some war with rere-mice for their leathern wings
To make my small elves coats.’’]
Loxias, the Shell-Apple, Ald. 2. 877. I. 46. sine Icone in agro
Warwic. in Pomaris, Mr. Willoughby.
[The Shell-apple = the Crossbill (cf. Carew, Fol. 25,Willughby,
p. 248, and Swainson, p. 67).]
Caprimulgus, the Goat-sucker, I. 52. tab. 20. Ald. 568. G.
215. Hune ceepit Dominus Cole, in agro Hantoniensi, an.
1664. rara admodum avis.
[It is strange that Merrett should describe the Goatsucker
as a rare bird. Turner also does not mention it as a British
bird, but relates that he made enquiries concerning its habits
in Switzerland.]
* Conrad Gesner (1516—1561), ‘“‘ De Avibus,” 1555.
+ Pierre Belon (ob. 1564), ‘‘ L’ Histoire des Oyseaux,”’ 1
{ Ulyses Aldrovandus (1522—1605), ‘‘ Ornithologiz,” 1
§ Johannes Jonstonus (1603—1675), ‘‘ De Avibus, 1650.
|| Robert Lovell (1630—1690), ‘‘ History of Animals,” 1661.
5505.
599.
116 BRITISH BIRDS.
Aves Granivore non canore.
Pavo, the Peacock, I. 52. tab. 22. Ald. 219. G. 594.
. . . Fem the Peahen, I. 56. tab. 22. Ald. ib. plo.
Gallo pavo, the Turkey-cock, I. 58. tab. 24. Ald. tab. 2.
39. G. 426.
Phasianus, the Pheasant, I. ut supra Ald. tom. 2. 49. G. 619.
Horum pulli vocantur Pouts, Est albus & alter fuscus.
[Page 173.] Urogallus, major Cock of the Wood, I. 60. tab.
25. Urogallus seu Tetrao major Ald. 2. 64. in Hibernia
occurrit.
[The Capercalzie (also as Capricala, p. 179). Merrett’s
statement that it occurs in Ireland is derived from Giraldus
Cambrensis’ “Topography of Ireland” (Chapter X.), “ wild
peacocks here abound in the woods,” cf. also Willughby
(p. 23), ‘ This is not found in England, but in Ireland there
be of them,’ and Ussher and Warren, ‘“ Birds of Ireland ”’
(p. 330).]
Gallina Coryllorum, the Hasel Hen, Grous, I. 60. tab. 25.
Ald. 2. 82. Bonosa Albert, G. 203.
[Merrett here differs from Aldrovandus, who figures what
is apparently the Francolin, under the title Attagen, and
states that it was also called the Hazel Hen. Gallina
coryllorum, Aldrovandus calls Rab-hun. There is some con-
fusion here, as in many other of Merrett’s statements, the
Hazel Hen, as far as we know, never having inhabited Great
Britain.]
Gall. Africana, the Guiney Hen, I. 58. tab. 24. Gallina
Guinea, Ald. tom. 2. 337. meleagris vel Gallus Numidicus,
G. 424.
Otis, Tarda, Bistarda, the Bustard, I. 62. tab. 26. Ald.
288. G. 430. On Newmarket Heath, & in Campestribus
Sarisburiensibus.
[Turner (p. 167), “in English a Bustard or a Bistard”
(cf. Willughby, p. 178).]
Attagen, a Godwit, I. 62, tab. 26. Ald. 275, in agro Lincoln.
[Turner’s “‘ Attagen”’ (p. 45) is the Godwit, cf. also Wil-
lughby (p. 292).]
Perdix Ruffa, the Partridge, I. 62, tab. 27. Ald. 2. 189. G.
606.
Coturnix, the Quail, I. 62. tab. 27. Ald. tom. 2. 153. G. 311.
(To be continued.)
Cites)
BIRD ROOSTS AND ROUTES.
BY
BRUCE F. CUMMINGS.
Tue following paper does not pretend to be an exhaustive
one, but is the result of my own observations during
the past winter in the district of Barnstaple, North
Devon.
All birds show considerable care in the choice of a
secure roosting site, and in order to spare labour in look-
ing for a fresh one every night, they frequently return
to the same place continuously.
A great many of the small species roost in company,
“cuddling,” or keeping close together in a bunch for
warmth. I have found four Wrens roosting in this way
in a hole in a tree, and have disturbed several sleeping
in their “ cock ”’ nests, but as far as my notes go, these
are generally vacant. On one occasion last summer I
noticed several Long-tailed Tits (probably a brood)
_ on the top of their nest, which had become quite flattened
and was covered with droppings. I expect, therefore,
that they returned to the nest every night, and when
they got too large, roosted on the top of it. Wrens
up to the number of thirty at a time, Long-tailed Tits,
and Golden-crested Wrens are recorded as_ roosting
together in this “bunching” fashion by Mr. G. A.
B. Dewar (in the Birds of Our Wood). One _ night
I saw two Blue Tits embracing each other in this way
in an apple tree. They looked like one large bird, so
close to each other were they. ‘This is not, however,
the usual habit of this Tit, for it generally roosts in
holes.
The Sparrow, as is well known, will occupy an old
120 BRITISH BIRDS.
House-Martin’s nest, or will line a hole in a thatch with
feathers. Partridges roost on the ground, while
Pheasants and fowls prefer to roost in trees.
A Hedge-Sparrow which I had under observation,
returned every evening last winter with the utmost
regularity to a cranny among dead ivy on anelm. When
driven out it would return in a few moments, first pitching
on a branch of the tree, and then swiftly sneaking into
the cranny, so that its return very frequently escaped
my notice entirely.
Kestrels roost at the same spot, in a quarry for ex-
ample, for many consecutive weeks.
The Pied Wagtail and the Grey Wagtail in the Barn-
staple district collect in some numbers every evening,
and roost in reed beds, like the Starlings. They drop
in from all directions, but do not come from more than
a mile distant. As a rule they collect on the ground,
or telegraph wires, near the reed bed, before disappearing
into the reeds, calling, and flying short distances in one
flock. This flock increases as the birds come up one
by one, and finally they drop into the reeds, where they
are joined by Robins and Wrens.
A great many species of birds roost in company, notably
Starlings. Others are: House-sparrows, Carrion Crows
(especially in Devon and Somerset), Magpies (which I
have observed near Barnstaple), Rooks, and Wood-
Pigeons.
In North Devon, in the colder months of the year,
the Rooks never roost in their rookery during, at all
events, the months of November, December, January,
February, and part of March, but they collect in large
numbers and roost in a wood, perhaps two or three
miles away from the rookery. In the morning the
roost breaks up, and the members of each community
make away, with the utmost regularity, to their respective
rookeries. At the rookeries they stand about “ talking,”
perhaps till nine o’clock, and then they disperse to feed
and meet again in the evening at the roost. If the
B. F. CUMMINGS: BIRD ROOSTS AND ROUTES. 121
morning is a frosty one they stay on the rookery trees
longer than usual.
At Tapely Park, Instow, Jackdaws collect in pro-
digious quantities, numbering many thousands (though
it is extremely difficult to judge the number), and roost
in the beech trees. A roost of Rooks occupies the same
group of trees. The interesting feature connected with
these Jackdaws is that the birds, in going to and from
their roost, always take exactly the same route. A large
flock which, during part of its course, is forced to fly
over the town of Bideford, always flies across exactly
the same part of the town every evening. It was by
watching and following up for several days another big
flock (numbering 200 or 300), which fed daily in the
fields at Braunton (about three and a half miles from the
roost) throughout the whole of last winter, that I finally
discovered this large roost. Every morning and every
evening this flock as regularly as a Royal Mail performs
this journey. They follow very carefully the same line
of flight, even to the barest detail, but occasionally they
fly very high, and they then appear to follow a more
direct course, for it is noteworthy that these birds do
not, as a rule, make a bee-line by any means. The reason
why they sometimes fly at a great height I cannot imagine.
I do not think that it has anything whatever to do with
wind or weather. Arrived at the roost, the birds
“rocket ’? down perpendicularly, dropping like plummets
through space, and commence to “chock” for an hour
or more before darkness falls. Starlings and Wood-
Pigeons when dropping in to roost, ‘“‘ rocket ’’ down in
this same eccentric way, and many birds behave
similarly at times, when they may be said to be “ at play.”
The habit with the roosting birds is, however, a constant
one, and takes place every evening. I have found
another big Jackdaw roost at Eggesford—in a very
wooded district.
Far more striking evidence as to the use of flight-lines
in these ‘‘ miniature migrations ”’ is to be seen in the
122 BRITISH BIRDS.
case of the Starling. A large Starling roost is a very
imposing sight, and has attracted the attention of a great
many writers. The very remarkable turns of flight
displayed by these birds at roosting time constitute,
perhaps, one of the most striking phenomena which
British bird-life has to show.
In the Barnstaple district there are four or five such
roosts. I have not discovered the birds travelling more
than six miles to and from a roost. I have repeatedly
=> SS Starlings main route
> — Route of lost flock
noticed how strictly the birds keep to their arbitrarily
prescribed line of flight. The best instance I can give
is shown in the accompanying map.
The flocks sweep along this main course with astonish-
ing regularity every night, flock succeeding flock, and
each separate flock pursuing the same course, as a rule
dividing at 2, one half going to one roost, and the other
half to another roost. They fly high—well above the
neighbouring hills and valleys—although it will be noticed
that they follow a valley for some distance ; this route,
moreover, was not merely roughly followed, but the birds
B. F. COMMINGS: BIRD ROOSTS AND ROUTES. 1238
came accurately along a mathematically straight line, as
far as @.
On February 19th I was at this spot watching the
Starlings. I was particularly interested in one flock
which never arrived along the usual, main, flight-line,
but cut into it at right angles (as indicated in the sketch
map). This flock, on this particular evening, however,
appeared to have lost its bearings, for it wandered about,
as I show in the sketch, as if trying to cross Coddon Hill,
which the birds never did at any time ; finally, it seemed
to perceive its whereabouts, doubled back and went on,
crossing the 400-foot ridge. On the 22nd, this same
flock was making for the roost, flying against a heavy
westerly gale. Hard weather and frost seems to make
no diminution in numbers at the roosts. I may mention
here that on every occasion that I have visited a Starling
roost last winter (about seven times) there was always
a Sparrow-Hawk flying close at hand, and I have repeat-
edly seen this Hawk harrying flocks as they came in to
roost.
Individual flocks, when perhaps three miles away from
their roost, and out of the main stream of ‘“ migration,”
followed, I found, in the few cases I had under ob-
servation, the same route every night. One small flock,
for example, always crossed the River Taw at a certain
point near a signal box, for several weeks last winter.
Routes, however, like these, on the extreme periphery
of the system, vary when the particular flock changes
its feeding quarters.
Possibly some of the foregoing will have to be modified
after more prolonged observation, but the main point
will hold—the universal use of flight-lines by Starlings in
going to and from their roost.
Whether birds, with their large semi-circular canals,
have a sense of direction or whether their migrations are
carried out by the aid of the sun or by the earth’s
magnetism or any other power is moot, yet one thing
seems certain and that is that they possess a powerful
124. BRITISH BIRDS.
memory. I feel sure that however the migrational
movement as a whole is effected, the way in which the
Swallow returns year after year to the same old beam in
the same old barn is simply memory—topographical
knowledge of the chief natural features and the general
mould of the country in the neighbourhood of its nesting
home.
( 125 )
ON THE MORE IMPORTANT ADDITIONS TO OUR
KNOWLEDGE OF BRITISH BIRDS SINCE 1899.
BY
Ho Po WETHERBY anp N; FP. TICHHURS®T.
Part X EET:
(Continued from page 87.)
STOCK-DOVE Columba cenas L. S. page 481.
DurHAM.—Two nests in drains underground entered by
gargoyles in walls (H. B. Tristram, Vict. Hist. Durham, vol. 1).
NORTHUMBERLAND.—First seen in 1878, now a regular
resident (A. Chapman, bird-Life of the Borders, p. 31.)
ScoTLaAND.—Caithness—A young bird was shot near
Castletown, Thurso, on December 4th, 1901. Believed to
be the first record for the county (T. E. Buckley, Ann. S.N.H..,
1902, p. 53). Ayrshire—A nest was found near Darvel in
May, 1902 (J. Paterson, t.c., 1902, p. 184). Bute.——Nests
were found in 1906, (é.c., 1907, p. 199). Shetlands.—One at
Halligarth, June 22nd-25th (T. E. Saxby, t.c., 1905, p. 117).
‘“*T cannot consider their appearance anywhere on the west
side of the backbone of Scotland (7.e., anywhere north of
Clyde) as anything but phenomenal” (J. A. Harvie-Brown,
Fauna N.W. Highlands and Skye, p. 260). A very full
account of its arrival and spread in the east is given in
“Fauna of Tay Basin and Strathmore” (pp. 259-266).
IsLE oF Man.—Nests in small numbers (P. Ralfe, B. of
Isle of Man, p. 178).
TRELAND.—Extending its range. Breeds in Leinster,
parts of Ulster and Munster to the Shannon (R. J. Ussher,
m litt.).
TURTLE-DOVE Turtur communis Selby.
SHROPSHIRE.—A marked increase of late years (H. E.
Forrest, in litt.).
CHESHIRE.—Now steadily increasing in numbers; it was
practically unknown in the county about fifty years ago
(Coward and Oldham, B. of Cheshire, p. 180).
Norto Watzs.—Is spreading westward, especially along
126 BRITISH BIRDS.
the north coast, where it breeds as far as Bangor. Has just
begun to penetrate to the western side of Montgomery and
Merioneth (H. E. Forrest, Vert. F. N. Wales, P. 304).
YORKSHIRE.—It is extending northwards. ‘* At the present
time its nesting area may be defined as being on the eastern
side of a line passing through the centre of the county by
Ripon, Harrogate, Leeds and Wakefield, to Sheffield.” The
most northerly point at which it is known to have nested
with certainty is Scarborough, where a nest was found in
June, 1900, and again at Wykeham by Mr. R. Fortune in
1905 (T. H. Nelson, B. of Yorks., pp. 496 and 497).
Scottanp.—Shetlands.—One at Lerwick on December
4th, 1905 (Ann. S.N.H., 1906, p. 199). One on May 28th,
and a good many in the second and third weeks of June, 1902,
were seen at Dunrossness (é.c., 1903, p. 153). Caithness.—
One on June 23rd at Barriedale (t.c., 1900, p. 83). Argyll.
One seen on August 29th, 1900, at Dhuheartach (f.c., 1901,
p- 139). Outer Hebrides—One was shot on the Flannan
Isles on September 14th, 1900 (é.c., 1901, p. 139). A young
bird appeared at Eoligary on August 18th, 1901, and was
caught on September 29th. Another older bird appeared on
September 25th (J. A. Harvie-Brown, f.c., 1902, p. 215).
N.W. Highlands and Skye.—Only an occasional visitant
(id., Fauna N.W. Highlands and Skye, p. 263).
Ist or Man.—A rare straggler (P. Ralfe, B. of Isle of Man,
p. 183).
JRELAND.—A female was shot on May 24th, 1904, near
Hillsborough, co. Down. It had eggs in the ovary, and
showed no trace of having been in captivity (N. H. Foster,
Irish Nat., 1904, p. 155). Messrs. Ussher and Warren record
thirty-three occurrences in May and twenty in June, on
migration (B. of Ireland, p. 227), so that Mr. Foster’s record
cannot be taken as an addition to the breeding records in
Ireland, which are only two of many years ago.
PALLAS’S SAND-GROUSE Syrrhaptes paradoxus (Pall.).
S. page 488.
1899.—From the last week of January to March 23rd,
a flock of thirty or so was seen on the north wolds of Lincoln-
shire in the same field in which they appeared in 1888. A
single bird was seen in the same district on May 19th, and a
small flight was observed in the Spurn district (Yorkshire)
on May 13th (J. Cordeaux, Ibis, 1899, p. 472).
1904.—A flock of eighteen was observed in the second week
of February flying northward over Millington, Yorkshire
(T. H. Nelson, B. of Yorks., p. 503).
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 127
1906.—A flock of six or seven was seen (in May) on some
“well-known links” in East Lothian (C. E. S. Chambers,
Field, 2, vi., 06, p. 901). A flock of about twenty was.
seen by Mr. R. Vincent on June 11th, in Norfolk, and ten were
seen by Mr. D. Annison at Somerton on June 17th, while
some were reported in Yorkshire in July (J. H. Gurney, Zool.,
1907, p. 130).
CAPERCAILLIE Tetrao urogallus L. 8. page 491.
ScorTLanp.—WMidlothian.—Two were seen in the autumn
of 1906 at Bavelaw (H. N. Bonar, Ann. S.N.H., 1907, p. 52).
Mr. W. Evans has six records, including one shot in Bavelaw
fir-wood nearly “ twenty years ago” (l.c.). Dumfriesshire.—
Three were seen in November, 1905, in the: N.N.W. of the
county (H. 8S. Gladstone, l.c.). Wigtownshire—Two were
shot about 1874 (H. Maxwell, t.c., 1907, p. 116). Ayrshire.—
A female was killed on December 14th, 1905, near Tarbolton
Moss (H. 8. Gladstone, t.c., 1906, p. 116). Aberdeenshire.—
A female in full male plumage was shot in January, 1906,
in the north of the county (E. T. Clarke, t.c., 1907, p. 117).
Hyprip.—A hybrid between this species and _ the
Pheasant was obtained at Stronchullin, Blairmore, Argyllshire,
in September, 1897. This bird and the three previously
known specimens of such a hybrid are fully described (W. E.
Clarke, é.c., 1898, pp. 17-21).
BLACK GROUSE Terao tetrix L. 8S. page 493.
CorNWALL.—Now almost extinct (J. Clark, Vict. Hist.
Cornwall, vol. 1).
ITRELAND.—Bones discovered in the Ballynamintra Cave,
co. Waterford, prove the former existence of this species in
Ireland (G. E. H. Barrett-Hamilton, Irish Nat., 1899, pp.
Pieand 37).
Hyprips.—Willow Grouse ¢ x Greyhen (P.Z.S., 1904,
Vol. I., p. 411, figure). Black Game x Pheasant—Fifty-
five specimens in Great Britain recorded (F. C. R. Jourdain,
Zool., 1906, pp. 321-330 and 433; Ann. S.N.H., 1906, p.
2a; cf. also Bull. B.O.C., XVI., pp. 54 and 55). “Since
these papers were written I have received notes of several
Other occurrences” (F. C. R. J. én litt.).
Intropuction.—Surrey.—Those introduced in 1875 on
Witley Common, and which did good for some time in helping
to keep the old stock going, are believed now (1900) to be
practically extinct (J. A. Bucknill, Zool., 1901, p. 253).
According to Mr. G. W. Swanton, two pairs bred in 1905 in
128 BRITISH BIRDS.
“a certain wild tract of country,” and a single Greyhen was
seen in the spring of 1906 (L. B. Mouritz, t.c., 1907, p. 93).
Norfolk.—The experiment of turning out Black Game at
Thetford by Mr. W. Dalziel Mackenzie has been continued,
and thirty were turned out in 1900-1901. Broods hatch off
regularly, but seem to disappear in some unaccountable
manner, and the numbers, in spite of fresh introductions,
steadily decrease (Heatley Noble, ¢.c., 1903, p. 155). Herts.—
A Greyhen was shot on December Ist, 1906, near Watford—
the only record for the county (W. Bickerton, in litt.). Hants.
—TIn the New Forest district they are almost extinct (H. F. W.)
(A useful article on the distribution of this bird in English
counties, by Mr. J. E. Harting, appeared in the Meld for
September 8th, 1900, p. 387.)
RED GROUSE Lagopus scoticus (Lath.). S. page 495.
[CoRNWALL.—One reported to have been shot near Tintagel
‘on December Ist, 1906 (J. Clark, Zool., 1907, p. 286).]
Hyprip.—Red Grouse ¢ x Bantam Fowl 2, exhibited
by J. G. Millais (Bull. B.O.C., VIII., p. 36).
Intropuction.—Shetland.—Some six hundred birds were
liberated on the mainland in September, 1901 (T. E. Saxby,
Zool., 1902, p. 113). Two were seen at Balta Sound,
November 16th, 1902 (2d., ¢.c., 1903, p. 157). Suffolk.iA
few brace were turned out about 1903 at Elveden, and they
have increased to about 150 birds (“‘ Head Keeper” in lit.
to J. Green, February 2nd, 1908). Surrey.—Details regarding
early introductions (J. A. Bucknill, Zool., 1902, p. 68).
PTARMIGAN Lagopus mutus (Montin).
Bones of this species were found amongst others in the
Shandon and Ballynamintra Caves, co. Waterford (G. E. H.
Barrett-Hamilton, Irish Nat., 1899, p. 17).
COMMON PARTRIDGE Perdix cinerea Lath. 8S. page 501.
A brood of twelve a few days old was discovered at
Stratton Strawless, Norfolk, on January 31st, 1906. They
were reduced to two by February 22nd, and these apparently
did not long survive (J. H. Gurney, Zool., 1907, p. 123).
RED-LEGGED PARTRIDGE Caccabis rufa (L.). 8S. page
503.
For some evidence of its migrating to the coast of Norfolk
and Yorkshire (cf. A. Patterson, Zool., 1905, p. 186, and W.
J. Clarke, t.c., p. 314).
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. ee
SPOTTED CRAKE Porzana maruetta. 8S. page 509.
ScorLanp.—Argyll.— One was taken in August, 1900, at.
Dhuheartach (Ann. S.N.H., 1901, p. 140). Perthshire —One
was shot at Murthly on November 2nd, 1903 (a late date
for so far north) (T. G. Laidlaw, t.c., 1904, p. 55). Dumfries-
shire.-—One was killed on September 3rd, 1903, at Noblehill
(R. Service, t.c., 1904, p. 69). Shetland.—One was shot in
Spiggie Marsh on September 25th, 1901 (t.c., 1902, p. 135).
This may be the same as the bird referred to in the
** Zoologist,” 1901, p. 391. Orkney.—One was shot at.
Stornoway on November 24th, 1906 (Field, 1906, p. 908).
IRELAND.—One was heard calling several nights early in
May, 1900, in a swamp at Cappagh, co. Waterford (R. J.
Ussher, Irish Nat., 1900, p. 160); it has twice been recorded
as breeding in Ireland. One was shot on October 8th, 1904,
near Templepatrick, co. Antrim (W. H. Workman, t.c., 1904,
p: 261).
CAROLINA CRAKE Porzana carolina (L.). 8S. page 510.
A young male, which had completed the autumn moult,
was shot by Mr. E. Lort Phillips on October 25th, 1901, when
snipe shooting with Mr. F. G. Gunnis in Rounach bog at the
- west end of Tiree, Inner Hebrides. The bird was very fat
Se b.O-C., XIL., p. 20; Ann..S.N.H.,, 1902, p: 9). The
species has been twice previously recorded in this country
(Berkshire, 1864, Cardiff, 1888), and since it has been recorded
several times in Greenland and breeds far north in North
America, we think it should be admitted fully to the British
list.
LITTLE CRAKE Porzana parva (Scop.). 8S. page 511.
SussEx.—One was caught near Rye in June, 1904 (N. F. T.).
SHROPSHIRE.—One was shot in November, 1898, at Petton
Park, near Shrewsbury (H. E. Forrest, Zool., 1900, p. 280).
IRELAND.—One was shot near Rathangan, co. Kildare,
on November 12th, 1903 (Williams and Son, Zool., 1903, p-
460). The bird has only once before occurred in Ireland.
(l'io be continued.)
PIED WAGTAIL REARING THREE BROODS.
It may be of interest to record that a pair of Pied Wagtails
have this year reared three broods from nests built in some
ivy at one end of the house here (Stonewall Park, Edenbridge,
Kent). The first brood of four left the nest on May 2nd.
The second ‘ brood ”’ consisted of a Cuckoo, which left the
nest on June 28th. The third nest contained three young,
which fledged on August Ist. The Wagtails continued to
feed the young Cuckoo until just before their third brood
hatched.
K. G. B. MeapE-WALDoO.
ON THE BRITISH BULLFINCH.
At the meeting of the British Ornithologists’ Club, held on
June 17th, 1908, I exhibited a series of Bullfinches, clearly
showing that the British race differed from its nearest ally,
the Pyrrhula pyrrhula europea, of Central Europe. ‘The
differences are, that the British race is slightly smaller, and
that the female has the back darker brown, and the under-
surface conspicuously darker and browner. The male, on
the other hand, does not differ very appreciably in colour,
though, if a series is compared, it is evident that the British
form has the red of the underside as well as the grey of the
upper-surface somewhat less brilliant.
At the meeting several members asked if I had compared
the British Bullfinch with the great Northern Bullfinch
Pyrrhula pyrrhula pyrrhula. To all who know these birds
it is needless to remark that a comparison with the latter
subspecies was unnecessary, as it is still larger and more
briliant than P. pyrrhula europea, the grey of the upperside
being purer, and the red of the under-surface brighter.
The somewhat darker and duller coloration of our British
Bullfinch, and its slightly smaller size, again confirms the
general inclination of British forms to be duller or darker,
and often smaller than their continental representatives.
The name of the British Bullfinch must be— :
PYRRHULA PYRRHULA PILEATA.
Under this name (Pyrrhula pileata) Macgillivray described it
in 1837, in Vol. I., p. 407, of his “‘ History of British Birds.”
NOTES. 131
Of its distribution he says :—‘‘ The Bullfinch is generally
distributed in Britain, occurring in most of our wooded and
cultivated districts, but avoiding bare maritime tracts, as
well as the northern islands, which are destitute of wood.”
Then, at the end of the article he adds :—‘‘ The Common
Bullfinch is said by authors to be of general occurrence in
the northern and temperate parts of Europe.” It is thus
quite clear that Macgillivray described the British Bullfinch,
and that only, for he merely adds that it is “‘ said by authors ”’
to inhabit great parts of Europe besides. The author also
says that he has “not observed any remarkable differences
between individuals, indicating the existence of two species
usually confounded, although I have heard it said that such
have been met with.” It follows that Macgillivray never
came across the Northern Bullfinch, which occurs, though
very rarely, as a straggler in England.
The case of the name of the British Bullfinch appears to
me to be different from that of the Lesser Spotted Wood-
pecker. Macgillivray also bestowed a new name on this
species in his work on “ British Birds” (Vol. III., p. 86),
calling it Picus striolatus. But then he says that he changed
its name to striolatus because this species was by no means
the smallest of even the Spotted Woodpeckers, and he
regards this bird as “peculiar to Europe,” saying that it is
‘said to be more abundant in the northern parts of Europe
than in France and Germany,” while it has not been found
in Scotland, nor even in many parts of England. I therefore
take it that Macgillivray re-named the “ European ” Linnean
Lesser Woodpecker, and consequently I bestowed a new name
on the British Lesser Spotted Woodpecker (antea Vol. I.,
p. 221). On the other hand, I think that we can safely adopt
the name pileata for the British Bullfinch, and thus avoid
creating a new name for this bird.
Ernst HARTERT.
HOW A CUCKOO DEPOSITED HER EGG.
Mr. G. H. Hiason kindly sends the following note from the
huntsman of the Ynysfor Hounds, whom he describes as a
very keen and accurate observer :—
“On the evening of May 24th I strolled down as far as the
marsh to look for some nests, and found a Meadow Pipit’s,
with four eggs, quite cold. The little birds were following a
Cuckoo close by, so I laid down in the rushes on the side of a
ditch, within five yards of the nest, and watched. Presently
the Cuckoo alighted near, and walking up to the nest, picked
182 BRITISH BIRDS.
up one of the Pipit’s eggs in her beak. This she put aside,
about two feet off, and then, walking back, she stooped with
her wings half raised, and laid her egg about three or four
inches from the side of the nest. She then turned round
and pushed the egg most carefully with her beak into the nest.
Then she picked up the Pipit’s egg in her beak and flew away,
dropping it about twenty yards further on. The Meadow
Pipits were there, looking on as if they knew what she was
doing, for they stopped there and did not follow the Cuckoo.”
‘“OwEN EPHRAIM.”
TUFTED DUCK IN SCOTLAND.
In the August number of British Birps, p. 84, some .ad-
ditional information is furnished regarding the Tufted Duck
as a Scottish bird. Among other items, there is one upon
which I, and I am sure others, would welcome further
information. I allude to Mr. Harvie-Brown’s averment
that ‘“‘ Macgillivray states that it was formerly a common
bird in the Outer Hebrides.” This statement is not only of
considerable interest but has highly important bearings
on the history of this species as a British bird, and I would
ask Mr. Harvie-Brown to tell us where Macgillivray published
the information. I have failed to find it in that distinguished
naturalist’s writings with which I am acquainted, or in any
of Mr. Harvie-Brown’s faunal works or papers, except in the
“Fauna of the N.W. Highlands” (from which you quote),
where, however, the desired reference is not afforded.
Wm. EAGLE CLARKE.
STARK’S RECORD OF THE BREEDING OF THE
SCAUP-DUCK AT LOCH LEVEN.
In the August number of this magazine (p. 85) attention is
drawn to my old friend, the late Dr. A. C. Stark’s, record of
the breeding of the Scaup at Loch Leven in 1880, under the
impression that it had been overlooked by Howard Saunders.
As a matter of fact, however, Saunders did not overlook the
record, with which he was perfectly familiar. He specially
cited it, both in the fourth edition of “ Yarrell,’ and in the
first edition of his own ‘“‘ Manual” (1889). But a note in the
Appendix to the latter foreshadowed its suppression in the
second edition. The note is as follows :—‘‘ As regards Mr.
A. C. Stark’s very positive and detailed account (Pr. R.
Phys. Soc. Edin., VII., p. 203) of the breeding of this species
on Loch Leven, Mr. W. Evans informs me that he subsequently
accompanied Mr. Stark to that spot several times and they
NOTES. 153
failed to identify a single Scaup, though Tufted Ducks were
abundant, as they had been for years previously.” In
December, 1897, when working at the second edition of the
‘**Manual,”’ Saunders gave me to understand, in a letter now
before me, that he was dropping the record, having made up
his mind it was a case of “‘ mistaken identification.”
During part of the time when Stark was studying medicine
in Edinburgh, he and I frequently took ornithological rambles
together, and delightful outings they were, for Stark was a
most interesting companion. It was in 1882 that he exhibited
the “ Scaup’s ”’ nest and eggs to the Royal Physical Society,
and the following year I twice accompanied him to Loch Leven
in the nesting season. Of course we looked out for Scaups,
but could detect none. Tufted Ducks, however, were
common, and we found several of their nests. The Tufted
Duck, it should be noted, had been proved to breed there eight
years before, and had probably done so for a much longer
period (cf. my notes on the species in Ann. S.N.H., 1896, pp.
148-155). It seemed strange that Scaups only, that is, as op-
posed to Tufted Ducks, were noted by Stark in 1880, and he
frankly admitted the possibility of his having made a mistake
in identification. I may here say that he frequently com-
plained of injury to his eyesight through using the micro-
scope. The opinion I then formed, and still hold, is that
the nest in question was not a Scaup’s but a Tufted Duck’s.
When the nest and eggs were on view in Stevens’ auction
rooms in June, 1902, 1 asked Saunders to tell me what he
thought of them. His reply was: “I should say Tufted,
decidedly.”’ I do not know into whose hands this lot passed
at the sale. Perhaps some reader of BritisH Brrps can
tell me. WILLIAM EVANS.
[Although we much regret having omitted to refer to the
first edition of the “ Manual,” we are not altogether sorry to
have been instrumental in resuscitating this erroneous record,
since it has drawn forth these interesting details from Mr. W.
Evans. The original record is a very important one and is
very positively stated in the fourth edition of ‘ Yarrell,”
and it is only right that all ornithologists should be put in
possession of the exact facts with regard to it, so that they can
judge for themselves. The details in the Appendix to the
first edition of the ““ Manual” miss a very important point,
viz., that Stark noted only Scaups in 1880, and the entire
suppression of the record in the second edition, coupled with
the comment that “‘ assertions respecting the breeding of this
species in Scotland lack confirmation,” issomewhat misleading
134 BRITISH BIRDS.
to those who do not possess the first edition. We fear that
someone bought these eggs as veritable Scaup’s, for they
fetched £2 7s. 6d. at the Stark sale in 1902. We have to
thank Messrs. A. H. Evans, J. A. Harvie-Brown, and Heatley
Noble for having also drawn our attention to this error.—
H. F. W. & N.F. T.]
THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE COMMON SCOTER IN
SCOTLAND.
As I have elsewhere pointed out, the distribution of the
Common Scoter in Scotland is peculiar, e.g., Caithness and
part of North Scotland, or “the Pentland area,” low-lying
lochs of the flow-lands; the high-lying mountain lochs
of certain remoter portions of Inverness-shire along the
direction of the Great Fault of the Caledonian Canal; [the
Isle of Tiree, uncertain ?]; and Ireland, as shown above on
p. 86. J. A. Harviz-Brown.
PALLAS’S SAND-GROUSE IN YORKSHIRE
AND KENT.
Durine the first week of June last three Sand-Grouse
(Syrrhaptes paradoxus) were observed in a field of young
corn in the eastern portion of Cleveland. Shortly afterwards
one of them was picked up, dead; and I have had an
opportunity of examining this specimen, which is a male in
excellent plumage. The other two birds were seen at intervals
until the middle of June, when they both disappeared.
T. H. NELson.
On July 4th last I obtained a satisfactory view of three
Pallas’s Sand-Grouse on the sand-hills north of Littlestone.
H. G. ALEXANDER.
GREEN-BACKED GALLINULE IN NORFOLK.
On June 19th, and for a fortnight previously, a Green-backed
Gallinule (Porphyrio smaragdonotus) was seen at Horsey by
three different marshmen, one of whom recognised the bird
from having seen a locally killed specimen some years
previously, and the other two men’s independent description
was unmistakable. M: CC. He-Sigp,
ABNORMAL EGGS OF THE RINGED PLOVER.
On June 18th, 1908, I found on a lake island in Ireland a
clutch of four abnormal eggs of (presumably) the Ringed
Plover (4gialitis hiaticola). In colour they were of a light
greenish-blue, and without markings. The surface of the
shells was somewhat rough, and with only one of them was it
NO'TES. 135
necessary to make full use of the drill ; in two of them a slight
pressure of the drill only was required to penetrate a black
and rotten spot on the shells. In the fourth there was a slight
exudation of the contents through a small aperture with black
edges. ‘The site, too, of the nest was abnormal, for it was
by the side of a small dead shrub, with a ragged robin and
another plant close by it. The nest itself was a depression in
damp moss. I find on reference to my notebook, that on
May 10th, 1906, there were on the same island three Ringed
Plover’s eggs (normal) in a depression (lined with dead rushes)
in mossy soil—though possibly on this island there is no spot
that would give a normal Ringed Plover’s nest, there is a
considerable tract on the mainland, some two or three hundred
yards off, where these birds nest in normal surroundings,
and here in 1906 and 1907 I found very similar eggs to the
faulty eggs of this year, it seems to me probable that they
were all laid by one and the same bird. H. TREVELYAN.
[Major Trevelyan has kindly allowed us to submit the nest
and eggs to the Rev. F. C. R. Jourdain, who reports upon them
as follows :—‘t The eggs are certainly remarkable. The faint
streaks at the end suggest those of Sandpipers, and so does the
nest. However, I do not attach much importance to the
latter, as from Major Trevelyan’s letter it is clear that the bird
only made the depression in the moss and placed one or two
straws in it. Measurements in this case give little help, and
weights are not of much use. White eggs are usually larger
than normally-coloured ones, and these are obviously imperfect
and prematurely laid, so that the weight would not be a safe
test. I think, however, I have found a good criterion in the
colour of the inside of the shell. Ringed Plovers’ eggs, when
fresh, show a distinct greenish tint, which fades somewhat,
but is generally perceptible. Sandpipers’ eggs I have always
found yellowish inside. These eggs show a very distinct
green when looked at against the light, and on that account
I should ascribe them to the Ringed Plover rather than to
the Common Sandpiper. A tendency ‘towards the same
aberration occurs also in the case of the Lapwing, Ruff, and
Woodcock, but is rare among Limicoline birds on the whole.
Dr. Ottosson tells me (in ltt.) that he has a clutch of Ringed
Plover’s eggs pale blue in colour, without any markings, and
there is an abnormal set in Mr. P. F. Bunyard’s collection
with very pale bluish-green ground and a few fine jet-black
spots and large underlying dark grey blotches; a clutch of
spotless bluish-green Curlew’s eggs is recorded in the
‘Zoologist ’ (1903, p. 352) from Brecon.’’—F. C. R. J.]
156 BRITISH BIRDS.
PEBBLE NEST OF A RINGED PLOVER.
In reference to Mr. Pycraft’s article on the nest of the Ringed
Plover (Vol. I., p. 373), it may be worth while to give details
of a somewhat unusual nest which I found with four fresh
eggs on July 2nd at Langston Harbour, near Portsmouth.
The nest was formed of small pebbles, and a few little pieces
of broken shell. It completely filled a rather deep hoof-mark
of a cow in sun-baked mud. There were 2000 pebbles,
weighing seven ounces, and they must have been collected
from a distance of twenty yards. H. Lynzs.
LAPWING’S NEST WITH FIVE EGGS.
On April 15th I was shown by a gamekeeper a Lapwing’s
(Vanellus vulgaris) nest with five eggs. JI examined the eggs
carefully, and found incubation had just begun. All the eggs
were exactly similar, and looked as if laid by the same bird.
The nest was in the middle of a large grass field, and no
other Lapwings but the one pair were within half to three-
quarters of a mile. The estate is strictly preserved, and no
boys had been near to interfere, nor had the keeper any
object in placing the fifth egg there. I think all were laid,
without doubt, by the same bird, and as the case seems to be
a perfectly authentic one I think it may be worth recording.
R. H. Rarrray.
[The Rev. F. C. R. Jourdain informs us that he has notes
of the occurrence of five eggs in one nest in the case of the
following species of Limicole :—Golden Plover, Lapwing
(numerous instances), Redshank, Snipe, Common Sandpiper,
Solitary Sandpiper and Curlew.—Ebs. |
SOLITARY SANDPIPER AND OTHER WADERS IN
KENT.
WHEN walking along the coast of Kent on July 18th last, I put
up a Sandpiper which, from its very dark colour, I knew to
be something out of the ordinary. I marked the bird down
and stalked it behind a sandbank, getting to within seven
or eight yards of it. Owing to its very dark greenish-
brown plumage and pure white underparts, pale brown
throat, and dark Sandpiper bill and legs, I concluded that
I had obtained an exceptionally fortunate view of the Green
Sandpiper. To make absolutely certain of its identity, I
put it up, expecting to see the pure white rump, but, to my
surprise, the rump was the same colour as the back, the white
only coming up on either side, as in the Common Sandpiper.
NOTES. 137
I again stalked it, and put it up once more, and am
now perfectly certain that it was a Solitary Sandpiper
(Totanus solitarius). The first time I got near the bird I
saw that there were two of the same kind, but I was only
able to follow the one when they flew off.
I am very well acquainted with the Common Sandpiper
(Totanus hypoleucus), having had ample opportunities of
watching it on the Tay in Scotland, in Devonshire on the
Tamar, occasionally at Woburn, and in innumerable other
places. Not only does the very dark plumage of Totanus
solitarius make it easy to distinguish from T'otanus hypoleucus,
but the wing bar, which is so conspicuous in the latter bird
in flight, was absent. I may add that I have had: several
opportunities of watching Wood-Sandpipers at close quarters
this summer, and on one occasion the Green Sandpiper.
On July 14th there was a small flock of eight or ten
Sanderlings, also on the Kentish coast. On July 18th their
numbers had greatly increased, as I first came across a party
of thirty-one, then another of thirteen, and later on as the
tide went out they were to be seen in small groups all along
the shore. Nearly all of them still retained their red throats.
On July 20th I saw a Curlew-Sandpiper with very red throat
and breast, and small parties of Whimbrel were occasionally
seen between the 13th and 21st. M. BEDFORD.
[On going to press we learn that a Solitary Sandpiper was shot
~ at Littlestone on August 15th, and this seems confirmatory of
the Duchess of Bedford’s most careful observations. Her
Grace is to be sincerely congratulated on having succeeded in
an identification of such difficulty.—EDs. |
A HITHERTO UNRECORDED SPECIMEN OF THE
LEVANTINE SHEARWATER FROM KENT.
Durine a visit to Canterbury in July last, in order to examine
the bird collection there, I found in the Hammond Collection,
which was bequeathed to the town in 1903, a specimen of a
Petrel which at once attracted my attention. After com-
paring it with the Manx Shearwaters in the same case, and
noting its points of difference, I consulted Dr. Godman’s
“Monograph of the Petrels” on my return home. I have
not the slightest hesitation in pronouncing this bird to be a
Levantine Shearwater (Puffinus yelkouanus).
The birds in the Hammond Collection are admirably housed
and cared for, but, like those in almost every local museum
that I have seen, urgently require proper labelling, and in
158 BRITISH BIRDS.
this collection there are no labels at all except those which
were attached by the original owner, and these are so small
that it is extremely difficult to read many of them. With
regard to the present bird, it has two hanging labels attached
to its legs, in the late Mr. Oxenden Hammond’s writing, which
read as follows :—*‘ Petrel undescribed, picked up dead at
Wingham” [Kent] “‘ about 1865. Considered a new species
by Gould ; see his autograph attached. Mr. Howard Saunders
has a closely resembling specimen from Gibraltar, but without
the rosy breast; he thinks it must be the Mediterranean
form of Puffinus anglorum, but does not feel sure.” ‘ Breast
rosy, like an adult Goosander.”’
I think we may take it that such a good ornithologist as
the late Mr. Oxenden Hammond would not have stated that
the bird was picked up at Wingham if he had any doubt on
the point, and from his remark on the “ rosy breast,’ which
has, of course, now disappeared, the bird must have been
very recently dead when it came into his hands.
I was not aware that any of the Petrels ever had this rosy
tint in life, and I cannot find any mention of it with regard
to the present species.
Mr. Hammond does not appear to have taken any further
steps to have the identification of the bird made certain, and
I presume thought that he was not justified in publishing
the record, since Saunders expressed some uncertainty.
This bird is an example of the darker phase of the Levantine
Shearwater in which the yellowish-brown wash on the flanks
extends across the belly, and to a rather less extent up the
breast. In other respects it exhibits the distinctive features
of this species very clearly. It is a little larger than the Manx
Shearwater, and the bill and wings are both slightly longer.
The back is a deep brown instead of black, the under tail-
coverts are brown instead of white, and as has been said
above, there is no pure white on the breast and belly, which
are everywhere washed with brown, and this is most intense
on the flanks. The feathers of the breast also are mottled
with dusky-grey. N. F. TickHurst.
x %
GOLDEN ORIOLE IN FIFESHIRE.—A female Oriolus galbula
is reported by the Misses Rintoul and Baxter as having been
obtained at Markinch on May 13th, 1908 (Ann. S.N.H., 1908,
p- 180).
GREAT GREY SHRIKES IN SCOTLAND.—Twenty-two occur-
rences of Lanius excubitor are recorded in Mr. John Patterson’s
useful ‘‘ Report on Scottish Ornithology for 1907” (Ann.
NOTES. 139
S.N.H., p. 137). The following we have not previously
referred to :—Mull.—One, March 9th. Pentland Skerries.—
One, September 24th. Shetlands——One flew on _ board
a boat twenty miles out on September 26th. North
Berwick.—One, October 12th. Gilston (Fife)—One, Novem-
ber 4th; one, November 28th (another is recorded at this
place by the Misses Rintoul and Baxter (t.c., p. 180) on April
22nd, 1908). Colinsburgh.—Two in November. Auch-
nasheen.—One, December 2nd. Another recorded in our
pages (Vol. I., p. 263) by the Duchess of Bedford, is not
referred to.
Woopcuat SHRIKE IN SussEx.—Mr. J. A. Clark records
that a male Lanius pomeranus was shot near Rye on September
15th, 1907 (Zool., 1908, p. 269).
Prep FLycaTcHER NESTING IN AYRSHIRE.—We have
omitted to refer to an interesting record of apparently the
first breeding of Muscicapa atricapilla in Ayrshire, viz., at
Glendoune, in 1907 (cf. M. Young, Ann. S.N.H., 1907, p
247).
CANARY SERIN IN ScorLtanp.—Mr. J. A. Harvie-Brown
records (Ann. S.N.H., 1908, p. 181) that a specimen of
Serinus canarius was captured, in company with Linnets, at
Springkerse, near Stirling, at the end of November, 1907.
The bird had no appearance of previous confinement, and
it was alive and still rather wild on May 29th, 1908. Mr.
Harvie-Brown does not actually claim it as a truly wild
wanderer, but we wonder if it would be so claimed by anyone
less cautious were it to escape again !
ROSE-COLOURED STARLING IN ScoTLAND.—Major_ A.
Hughes-Onslow writes that he had an excellent view on July
2nd last of a specimen of Pastor roscus on some sandy ground
near Reay, in Caithness (Meld, 11, vi1., 08, p. 91).
DomeED Nests or JackpAws.—Mr. T. T. Mackeith records
that he found in May, 1907, in West Renfrewshire, some
Jackdaws’ nests which were large structures, roofed over with
sticks, with a hole large enough to admit the bird. They were
built in spruce fir trees (Zool., 1908, p. 232). This reminds
us that Mr. W. Wells Bladen has for several years reported
the occurrence of similar nests of the Jackdaw in Staffordshire
(cf. Trans. N. Staffs. F. Club, 1901). Another domed nest
of this bird was found by Mr. C. E. Wright near Kettering
(er. Journ. Norths. N.H. Soc., 1899, p. 174). The Rev.
140 BRITISH BIRDS.
F. C. R. Jourdain found a colony in Shropshire in 1901
(cf. Eggs of Europ. Birds, p. 16), and other instances have
been recorded. |
SupposED ALPINE Swirt IN NortH Dervon.—Mr. T. H.
Briggs records (Zool., 1908, p. 269) that he saw “recently” a
Swift which he identifies as Cypselus melba, flymg low at
Lynmouth. His attention was directed to the “size” of the
bird—presumably the large size which is, of course, a very
striking characteristic of this species; but Mr. Briggs goes on
to say that he distinctly ‘‘saw the grey underside” of the
bird as it flew over his head. The Alpine Swift looks very
white underneath when flying, and the use of the word
‘‘orey”’ in describing this distinctive characteristic makes us
doubtful of the identification being correct. There was a
sea-fog at the time.
Snowy Owl IN THE OvuTER HeEBRIDES.—Mr. J. A. Harvie-
Brown records a fine example of Nyctea scandiaca shot on
South Uist in October, 1907 (Ann. S.N.H., 1908, p. 182).
Scops Own IN FrresHirRE.—A female Scops giw was
obtained near Largo. The Scops Owl has been recorded
only eight times previously in Scotland. (W. Evans, Ann.
S.N.H., 1908, 183).
Montacu’s HArRIER IN SuRREY.—Mr. Collingwood Ingram
reports (Zool., 1908, pp. 308-311) that a pair of Montagu’s
Harriers nested in Surrey this year in the same place as those
recorded last year (cf. antea, Vol. I., pp. 237 and 351).
Unfortunately the eggs failed to hatch. The nest was carefully
protected by a Royal Society for the Protection of Birds’
watcher, but possibly too much attention was paid to the
nest by observers and photographers.
Common BirreRN IN HADDINGTONSHIRE.—The Rev. H.
N. Bonar writes that a specimen of Botaurus stellaris (the third
observed in East Lothian this year) was picked up dead on
Gullane Links in April (Ann. S.N.H., 1908, p. 183).
GADWALL IN ABERDEENSHIRE.—Messrs. L. N. G. Ramsay
and A. L. Thomson satisfactorily identified two specimens
of Anas strepera (a very rare bird in the district) in the estuary
of the Don on September Ist, 1907 (Ann. S.N.H., 1908,
p. 184).
PINTAILS IN SHETLAND.—A pair of Dafila acuta was found
breeding at Dunrossness in 1905 (cf. antea, p.54). Mr. Harvie-
Brown now announces that there are four or five pairs there
this year (Ann. S.N.H., 1908, p. 184).
OCTOBER i
1908,
EGGS OF PALEARCTIC BIRDS.
1A Work ‘on this subject, ‘illustrated: with ‘BEAUTIFULLY -
COLOURED PLATES, is now being issued. .
Write for Full Prospectus and a Part for inspection to
WILLIAMS & NORGATE,
14, Henrietta Street, Covent snl London, W.C.
-DALLMEYER’S
Naturalists’ Camera,
19007, MODEL,
For Telephoto or Ordinary: LENSES.
‘DALLMEYER’S
Lenses are used
Dy the most
A skilled Bird
Photographers.
The following “are—»
specially recommended :
THE STIGMATIC SERIES Il. F/6 (Convertible.)
THE SERIES D PATENT PORTRAIT LENSES F 6.
(A Rapid Long Focus Lens at a Moderate Price.)
- High or Moderate Power Telephoto Lenses. (Original Make).
We are Specialists in Cameras and Apparatus for Photo- Ornithologists. ns
-’ CATALOGUES AND ADVICE FREE.
J. H. DALLMEYER, Limitep, beNziL rob..
Showrooms: 25, NEWMAN sm, W. “NEASDEN, LONDON, Mt;
WATKINS & DONCASTER,
Raturalists, |
‘And Manufacturers of CABINETS and APPARATUS for Entomology, Birds’ Eee
and Skins, and all Branches of: Natural History. «>
A LARGE STOCK OF INSECTS, and BIRDS’ EGGS and ‘SKINS.
Speciality: —Objects for Nature Study, Drawing ees &e.
BIRDS, MAMMALS, &c., PRESERVED and MOUNTED by FIRST-CLASS WORKMEN,
TRUE TO NATURE.
All Books: and Publications on ‘Natural History sippliea.-
36, STRAND, LONDON, W.C. (Five Doors from | aa ‘ros,) :
Gutslowns eke pp.) post free.
BRITISH BIRDS, Vol. /1., Pl. 4.
GREEN WOODPECKER. ‘‘ KEEPING AN EYE ON
(Photographed by Miss Turner.)
THE ENEMY.’
?
ee
DRUDSHBIRDS
Boeri) BY H.-F. WITHERBY, F-.25., M:B.0.U.
eeoislED -BY W. P. PYCRAFT, A.LS, M.B.0.U.
ConTENTS OF NuMBER 5, VoL. II. OctTosBER 1, 1908.
Green Woodpecker versus Starling, by Emma L. Turner,
F.u.S. (Plate IV.) .. ip ee ae a :
On the More Important Additions to our Knowledge of
British Birds since 1899, by H. F. Witherby and N. F.
Ticehurst. Part XIV.—(continued from page 129) is 146
Some Early British Ornithologists and their Works, by
W. H. Mullens, M.A., LL.M., M.B.0.u. III.—Christopher
Merrett (1614—1695)—(continued from page 118) ee 151
Notes :—Old English Nesting Bottles (E. G. B. Meade-
Waldo). Black Redstarts in Merioneth (H. E. Forrest).
Black-headed Wagtail in Kent (J. B. Nichols). Great
Grey Shrike in Scotland (H. W. Robinson). Two-
barred Crossbill in Sussex (J. B. Nichols). Tufted
Ducks Nesting in the Outer Hebrides (J. A. Harvie-
Brown). Distribution of the Common Scoter in
Scotland (H. W. Robinson). Pallas’s Sand-Grouse in
Cheshire (T. A. Coward). Supposed Black Grouse and
Ptarmigan from Irish Caves (R. J. Ussher). The Oyster-
eatcher’s Method of Feeding on the Edible Mussel.
Killdeer Plover in Kent (N. F. Ticehurst). Solitary
Sandpiper in Kent (N. F. Ticehurst). Late Nests of
the Great Crested and Little Grebes (A. G. Leigh), etc. 164
Review :—How to Attract and Protect Wild Birds .. he 172
Page 141
GREEN WOODPECKER versus STARLING.
BY
EMMA L. TURNER, F.L:s.
(PratEH FV.)
WHILE wandering about soon after dawn on the morning
of May 8th, I came across one of the most amusing
incidents connected with bird life which I have ever
watched.
A pair of Green Woodpeckers, after having for some
years enjoyed undisputed possession of a nesting hole in
an oak tree, were engaged in a “‘tooth-and-nail”’ encounter
with a pair of Starlings which were maliciously en-
deavouring to obtain possession of their neighbour’s
142 BRITISH BIRDS.
home. The dispute raged continuously till May 14th,
when I settled it by putting up a nesting-box for the
Starlings; this they immediately annexed, and ultimately
both pairs brought off their respective broods in safety
and comparative peace. |
During the campaign I saw much that was both
interesting and amusing in the tactics employed by the
opponents. While the Woodpeckers were undoubtedly
the more powerful birds, the determination, readiness of
wit and general finesse of the active and irrepressible
Starlings commanded my respect.
The following is an account of what happened on May
9th between 6 a.m. and 3 p.m. and is typical of all the
after days of warfare, during which, however, I only
watched at odd times for two or three hours at a stretch.
When I arrived on the scene the Woodpeckers
flew away, being shy and easily alarmed, but soon
returned when I hid myself. The moment the Starlings
were left to themselves they carried into the hole every
available bit of twig and rubbish they could seize,
working together with a feverish energy that made me
feel tired, so that in five minutes they seemed to have
collected ample material for several nests! By-and-by,
however, a Woodpecker would return, then one Starling
carried on the fight while the other, when possible,
continued the nest building with more or less success ;
sometimes holding the entrance of the citadel while its
rightful owner clung to the outside (see page 144), looking
in and out and ali around but not always daring to take
possession. For although undoubtedly the stronger,
and able to hold her own when once inside the tree, the
Woodpecker seemed unable to cope with her smaller and
more active opponents at close quarters. If she
ventured inside when either or both Starlings were in
possession a desperate scuffle could be heard which
generally ended in the defeat and ejection of the Wood-
pecker, but not always. On one occasion I saw the
Woodpecker seize a Starling by the beak and drag it
E. L. TURNER: WOODPECKER v. STARLING. 1438
forth, then slipping inside she soon ejected the other,
but this was when her mate was near. The male
Woodpecker did not take his fair share of the fight
while I was watching, and often the hen bird would lean
half out of the nest (see Plate 4) and call to him in soft
complaining tones, but his answering cry generally came
from a long distance off, and she was left for hours to
continue the combat alone.
The Starlings, on the contrary, worked well together
and sometimes a third came to their assistance. How-
ever, when once the Woodpecker gained possession of
her home the Starlings literally had not a “look in,”
but sat disconsolately on a branch near at hand and
watched, by no means without protest, while the Wood-
pecker slowly and daintily threw out each twig until the
ground beneath the tree was strewn with débris. I wish
it had beeri possible to obtain photographs of this part
of the proceedings because the obvious enjoyment of the
Woodpecker as she did this was worth recording. After
watching every bit of rubbish till it reached the ground.
she looked up at the discomfited pair of Starlings
between each act and chuckled softly with her head on
one side, while the lookers-on gave vent to sundry
long-drawn-out screeches of disapproval. There was a
particularly large and dry laurel leaf which one Starling
had wrestled with and carried into the hole after great
struggles, because its stiffness and length impeded the
bird’s flight. When this treasure was thrown out and
fell to the ground with a dry rattle, both Starlings
whistled so plaintively that I laughed aloud and
frightened the Woodpecker so that she fled. Then the
Starlings had another “ innings,” and for half an hour did
what they pleased and threw out a large quantity of the
wooden chips dear to the Woodpecker; but at noon
the rightful owners again had full possession until 2.15,
when something disturbed them, and the enemy held
the citadel till 3 p.m., when I left, after seeing the Wood-
peckers once more reinstated.
144 BRITISH BIRDS.
A favourite trick of the Starlings was to sit on‘a
branch some little distance away and “ yaffle.”’ This
at first always lured the Woodpecker from her hole, and
during the week of fighting the Starlings became very
proficient in ‘“‘ yaffling,” but after a time the Wood-
Guarding the Entrance. (Photographed by Miss Turner.)
pecker learnt wisdom and was not deceived. So the
fight alternated for a week until I began to fear for the
ultimate success of the rightful owners of the nesting
site, and even went so far as to harden my heart and
consult with the powers that be as to the advisability
of shooting the robbers. On one occasion, however, there
E. L. ‘TURNER: WOODPECKER v STARLING. 145
had been three Starlings and one Woodpecker inside the
tree together ; so it seemed more than probable that, if
this marauding pair suffered the extreme penalty of the
law for their sins, others might carry on the feud.
Consequently, the nesting-box was tried first, with happy
results ; for the Starlings occupied it the same evening
(May 14th), and their young ones were fledged on June
19th, while the young Woodpeckers flew away a week later.
Evidently even in wild nature the strongest does not
always win, art and science hold their own. This the
Starlings seemed to know well when they pitted their
wits against mere physical strength ; for it seemed to me
they would win finally by mere persistence and cunning.
When very agitated, the Green Woodpecker would
rapidly ascend the bole of a neighbouring beech, and as
rapidly descend backwards in a curiously jerky manner,
as if she were climbing hand over hand down a rope.
I have never before seen any of the Woodpeckers
descend in this manner.* Owing to the height of the
nesting hole I was obliged to use a telephoto lens, the
slowness of which, added to the darkness of the wood,
made it impossible to obtain photographs of the amusing
attitudes and fighting tactics of these birds, and, when
the young were hatched out, the surrounding foliage had
become so dense as to make it practically impossible to
get any picture with aslow lens. Out of some fifty plates
exposed, the two accompanying photographs (from which
part of the background has been taken out) were almost
the only result worth mentioning; but the enthusiastic
photographer, even if unsuccessful in his art, sees so
much of wonder and beauty that he has no cause to
srumble if the pictorial results are not always just what
he hoped for.
* This article was received before the publication of Col. Feilden’s
note on this subject (see p. 93).—EDs.
ie EY ae
ON THE MORE IMPORTANT ADDITIONS TO OUR
KNOWLEDGE OF BRITISH BIRDS SINCE 1899.
BY
H. F. WITHERBY and N.. Ff PICHHUREL
Parw XFYV:
(Continued from page 129.)
BAILLON’S CRAKE Porzana bailloni (Vieill.).
EssEx.—One was caught by a dog near Dagenham on
October 3rd, 1874, and is now in the museum of the Essex
Field Club (Field, 2, 111., 04). -
SURREY.—One was caught alive in Church Street, Godal-
ming, in 1837, and is in the Charterhouse collection. An adult
female was also caught alive between Mitcham and Carshalton
about the end of May, 1847 (J. A. Bucknill, B. of Surrey,
p. 274). !
Sussex.—One was killed against the telegraph wires on
Pett Level in June, 1907 (N.F.T., cf. antea, Vol. 1, p. 359).
Kent.—A female was shot by Captain R. Alexander near
Lydd, on November 24th, 1906 (R.E.C., Field, 22, xt1.,
1906 = .c/ antea; Vol. 4a= p.- 309).
HAMPSHIRE.—Four occurrences are noted (Kelsall and
Munn, B. of Hants, p. 271).
NortH Wates.—A male was caught by a dog in a ditch
near Colwyn Bay on November 6th, 1905 (H. E. Forrest,
Zool., 1905, p. 465).
CHESHIRE.—An adult male was captured alive near Stock-
port in May, 1905 (T. A. Coward, t.c., 1906, p. 395).
ScoTtanpD.—A female was shot at Thurso in September,
1898 (W. Arkwright, Ann. S.N.H., 1899, p. 50).
[ALLEN’S GALLINULE Porphyriola alleni (Thompson).
An immature example of this African species alighted on a
fishing-boat off Hopton, near Yarmouth, on January lst,
1902, and was captured (J. H. Gurney, Zool., 1902, p. 98).
The species has occurred in the winter in Italy and Sicily,
and it is possible that this bird was a genuine storm-
driven migrant. The specimen is now in the possession of Mr.
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 147
J. B. Nichols. It may be noted that a bird of this species
has been recorded as having been caught at sea 190 miles off
the coast of Liberia. |
CRANE Grus communis Bechst. 8S. page 521.
NorFrotk.—On April 7th, 1898, four were seen by
Mr. Pashley near Glaven, and they were afterwards
reported at Weybourne, and again at Runton, after
which they took their departure (J. H. Gurney, Zool.,
1899, p. 119). An immature bird was seen for about
three weeks near Great Yarmouth in April, 1906 (J. E.
Knights, ¢.c., 1906, p. 194).
ScoTLAND.—A young bird appeared at the Pentland
Skerries on May Ist, 1903, and was shot two days
aiterwards (J. Tomison, Ann. S.N.H., 1903, p. 186).
One was seen in North Shetland on May 16th, 1906
ole Hy. Saxby, ¢.c., 1907, p. 50). Qne was shot near
Stornoway on May 14th, 1906. The species had not
previously been recorded from the Outer Hebrides
(N. B. Kinnear, t.c., 1907, p. 84).
GREAT BUSTARD Otis tarda L. 8S. page 523.
InTRODUCTION.—In 1900 seventeen were imported
from Spain and placed by Lord Walsingham on Lord
Iveagh’s estate at Elvedon, Norfolk. Fifteen survived
the winter (they were feather pinioned), but they then
left their secure retreat, where they had a run of some
800 acres, and appear to have dispersed over the country.
Several were soon shot, and the whereabouts of four only
were known at the end of 1901. By the end of the
following year only two remained. They appear to have
laid eggs, but no young hatched, and the experiment
must be deemed an entire failure.
[IRELAND.—Two were seen near Thurles, co. Tip-
perary, and one of them was shot on December 20th,
1902 (Williams & Son, Field, 1903, p. 447). There is
no previous authentic record of the occurrence of this
bird in Ireland, and we think that these examples may
have been ‘“‘ escapes.’? We believe that all the intro-
duced birds mentioned above have not even yet been
accounted for. |
[LINCOLNSHIRE.—Two females were killed, one at
Weelsby, the other at Tetney, on December 15th and
29th, 1902 (G. H. Caton Haigh, Zool., 1903, p. 368).
These are looked upon by Mr. Gurney (t.c., p. 125) as
148 BRITISH BIRDS.
genuine migrants, and not part of the Norfolk introduced
birds, but there seems no proof for this. ]
JERSEY.—Two were shot on King’s Meadow in
December, 1899 (H. Mackay, t.c., 1904, p. 378).
LITTLE BUSTARD Otis tetrax L. 8S. page 525.
Yorxks.—One was shot at Kilnsea on December 7th,
1902 (P. W. Loten, Nat., 1903, p. 61).
NorFroutK.—One was shot at Feltwell on Jan. 25th,
1898 (J. H. Gurney, Zool., 1899, p. 118). An ague
female was shot at Ludham on Nov. 26th, 1900 (7d., t.c.,
1900, p. 138). A male was shot at Caister-by-the-Sea
on Dec. 11th, 1902 (7d., ¢.c., 1903, p. 137).
SuUFFOLK.—A male in full summer plumage was shot
on May 3rd, 1898, at Kessingland, near Lowestoft.
This is the first instance of a bird in this plumage having
occurred in the Eastern counties (T. Southwell, é.c.,
1899, p..- 31; and. 1900, 99° 115):
STAFFORD.—One was shot by a keeper at Warslow about
1899, but was not recorded at the time as it was killed during
the close season (F. C. R. Jourdain, in litt.)
Drrspy.—A female was shot on Middleton Top, near
Youlgreave, on May 14th, 1901 (W. Storrs Fox, Zool.,
1901, p. 270).
KErnt.—One was shot in Thanet on Dec. 20th, 1902
(C. Ingram, ¢.c., 4908, p.. 272).
SussEx.—One was shot at Ashburnham on Dec. 23rd,
1900 (G. W. Bradshaw, t.c., 1900, p. 428)—[the date
should be Dec. 28th.—N.F.T.]. A female was shot
near Burpham on Dec. 16th, 1901 (W. Percival Westell,
t.c., 1902, p. 70). A female was killed against telegraph
wires at Hollington in February, 1902 (N.F.T.). A
female was shot at Westfield on Dec. 26th, 1905 (N.F.T.).
SoMERSET.—The Rev. W. Fox reported that a female,
previously unrecorded, was shot on Sedgemoor about 1872, and
was now in the possession of a small farmer (Fveld,13, vit., 07.)
JERSEY.—A female was shot on Feb. 4th, 1902 (H.
Mackay, t.c., 1904, p. 378).
STONE-CURLEW (Cdicnemus scolopax .(S. G. Gm.).
S. page 529. |
Kent.—Owing to protection, the numbers annually
breeding in the county show a slight increase (N.F.T.).
SuRREY.—There is at least one locality in which it
may be regularly seen (1898) (J. A. Bucknill, Birds of
Surrey, pp. 281-282).
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 149
MERIONETH.—One was obtained near Towyn on
Jan. 6th, 1903 (H. E. Forrest, Vert. F. N. Wales, p. 323).
IRELAND.—One was reported to have been shot at
Magheragollen, Gweedore, co. Donegal, on Oct. 12th,
1903 (D. C. Campbell, Irish Nat., 1904, p. 119).
[It formerly bred in Oxfordshire (Zool., 1903, p. 18; 1899,
p-. 487), Buckinghamshire (¢.c., 1903, p. 450), Cambridgeshire
(t.c., 1862, p. 8168), Bedfordshire (Vict. Hist. Beds., p. 128),
Nottinghamshire (B. of Notts., p. 253)].
PRATINCOLE Glareola pratincola (lL.). 8S. page 531.
Kent.—A male was shot by Mr. Southerden at
Jury Gap, Romney Marsh, on May 30th, 1903. The
specimen, which was the first recorded example from Kent,
is in Mr. Fleetwood Ashburnham’s collection (N. F.
Micehurst, Bull. B.O.C., XIU., p. 77). An adult pair
were shot near the same place on July 19th, 1904 (N.F.T.).
ScoTLaAnpD.—A young bird, only the second example
of the species which has ever been obtained in Scotland,
was shot on the Mill Burn, Rocksands, Montrose, by
Mr. Stormond, on Nov. 4th, 1899 (J. A. Harvie-Brown,
man. SN .H,, 1900, p: 51).
CREAM-COLOURED COURSER Cursorius gallicus (J. F.
Gm.). 8S. page 533.
One was shot in Bouley Bay, Jersey, on Oct. 19th, 1896
(J. E. Harting, Zool., 1896, p. 435). The Channel Islands
are not included by Howard Saunders amongst the places
where this bird has occurred.
DOTTEREL Ludromias morinellus (L.). 8S. page 535.
Nortu Waes.—Four were seen on the top of one of the
highest mountains in Merionethshire on May 10th, 1901, and
on May 8th, 1902. A search was made in June, 1901, but
none were seen (O. V. Aplin, /bzs, 1901, p. 517, and 1903,
p. 133). It appears to occur sparingly on the mountains in
spring (H. E. Forrest, Vert. F. N. Wales, p. 330).
JRELAND.—One was shot from a flock of more than a
hundred birds (thought to be of the same species) in Donegal
Bay on Nov. 29th, 1905 (A. R. Nichols, Irish Nat., 1906,
p. 45). Three females were shot at Athlone on Nov. 10th,
1906 (W. P. Williams, t.c., 1907, p. 183).
OvutEeR Hesripes.—A bird-of-the-year was received from
Eilean Mor, Flannan Isles, in September, 1906. The species
had not been recorded previously from the Outer Hebrides
(W. E. Clarke, Ann. S.N.H., 1907, p. 53).
150 BRITISH BIRDS.
ScotLAND.—Mr. Harvie-Brown notes an extension south,
if not an actual increase in numbers and breeding area, in
the Tay district, which began about 1900, suddenly, and was
afterwards continued rapidly, especially about 1902-3 (ef.
Fauna of Tay Basin, pp. 299-304).
RINGED PLOVER Agialitis hiaticola (L.). 8S. page 539.
Inland Nesting.—In Worcestershire (D. R. Grubb, Zool.,
1902, p. 316) ; in Middlesex (R. B. Lodge, é.c., 1901, p. 389).
KENTISH PLOVER Agialitis cantiana (Lath.). 8S. page
543.
DurHam.—An adult female was found dead near the
North Gare breakwater (Teesmouth) at the end of May, 1904
(C. E. Milburn, Nat., 1904, p. 283).
Norts.—One was seen on April 13th, 1904, near Mansfield
(J. Whitaker, Birds of Notts., p. 255).
Kernt.—Owing to the rigid protection now in force in their
breeding area, their numbers are steadily on the increase
(Soph:
KILLDEER PLOVER Agialitis vocifera (L.). 8S. page 545.
A specimen shot at Peterhead by Mr. Andrew Murray, Jun..,
in 1867, was labelled ‘‘ Charadrius hiaticula,’ and was dis-
covered in the University Museum at Aberdeen and identified
as an example of this species by Mr. W. P. Pycraft in July,
1904. This, therefore, is the first British-killed specimen
(W. P. Pycraft, Ann. S.N.H., 1904, p. 247).
LESSER GOLDEN PLOVER Charadrius dominicus P. L. 8.
Miller. S. page 549.
SurrEy.—A specimen in the Charterhouse collection
was shot on Epsom Racecourse on Noy. 12th, 1870 (J. A.
Bucknill, Birds of Surrey, p. 283).
EssEx.—One (which was afterwards identified at the British
Museum) was shot by Mr. H. Nunn off Shell Haven Point,
on the Thames, Aug. 6th, 1896 (H. Nunn, Zool., 1897, p. 330).
SOCIABLE PLOVER Vanellus gregarius (Pall.). 8S. page
5b3.
IRELAND.—A female was shot on Aug. Ist, 1899, in a turnip
field, by a farmer at Robinstown, near Navan, co. Meath
(E. Williams, Irish Nat., 1899, p. 233).
| [It will be remembered that one was recorded from Kent
in 1907, vide antea, Vol. 1., p. 57.]
(Lio be continued.)
( 151 )
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS
AND THEIR WORKS.
BY
VW OE “NUL NS, M.A., LL.M., ieB.O.U-
WI.—CHRISTOPHER MERRETT
(16141695).
(Continued from page 118.)
Rusticola minor, the Snipe, or Snite, I. 62. tab. 27. Scolopax,
Gallinago minor Ald. tom. 3. 479. Gallinago sive Rusticola
minor, G. 448. est altera Hujus species nuncupata, the Jack
Snipe.
[‘‘ Snite ” is the old form of Snipe. Gesner (p. 483) gives
“snyt”? as an English name for the Sandpiper. “Jack
Snipe,” cf. Willughby (p. 25).]
Rusticola major, Scolopax. Gallinago, I. 88. tab. 31. the
Wood-cock, Ald. tom. 3. 473. Rusticola vel Perdix Rustica
major, G. 445. Utreq ; Hyeme huc migrant. ex Hibernia.
[Neither Turner nor Willughby mention the Woodcock
as frequenting Ireland. Merrett’s statement that it migrates
hither from that country is derived from Giraldus Cambrensis’
account (Chapter X.), ““ There are immense flights of Snipe
(acete) . . . both the larger species of the woods and the
smaller of the marshes.’’]
Ralla-Anglor, the Rail, or King of the Quails, Ald. 3. 455.
[Cf. Willughby (p. 23). Turner (p. 71) states, curiously
enough, that he had not seen or heard the Corn Crake
‘anywhere in England, save in Northumberland alone.” ]
Upupa, the Hoopee, I. 62. tab. 27. Ald. 2. 704. G. 703. In
the New Forest in Hampshire, & in Essexia, sed raro invenitur.
[The Hoopoe is still found. occasionally in the New Forest.
Merrett describes it as rare, cf. Charleton (p. 92), who calls
it a Hoopoop, and states that it rarely visits this country,
and that a friend of his killed one near London ‘‘ Hyeme
tamen Superiori.”” This bird, however, was not rare in
152 BRITISH BIRDS.
Norfolk. Sir Thomas Browne, in his notes says: “ Upupa,
or Hoopebird, so named from its note, a gallant marked
bird wch I have often seen and ’tis not hard to shoote them ”
(cf. Southwell, p. 23).]
Pulveratrices domestice.
[p. 174] Gallus, a Cock, I. 82. tab. 29. Ald. tom. 2. 200.
. . . Hirsutis pedibus, ib.
. . . Palustris, a Moor-hen, G. 421, Morenna Angl. Ald.
2. 341.
[The Black Grouse. Turner (p. 87) calls it the Morhen
(cf. Willughby, p. 173). Aldrovandus (Lib. XIV., Cap. XV.)
treats ‘‘De Gallo Scotico Sylvestris & de Morhenna
Anglorum,” and informs us that “‘ Scoti in hoc genere marem
vocant Ane black cock, id est, Gallum nigram: foeminam
. ane grey hen, id est Gallinam fuscam.’’]
Gallina Rustica Turn. quam variis de causis Attagenem
esse conjicit.
[C/. Turner (p. 87). ]
Pulveratrices Lavatrices.
Fulica, a Coot, I. 88. tab. 31. Ald. 395. G. 344.
Ispida, the Kings-fisher, I. 88. tab. 31. Ald. 5. 520. G. 513.
Gallina Aq. I. 88. tab. 31.
[The figure in Jonstonus is that of the Water-Hen.]
Gallina serica, I. 88. tab. 31. sic dicta a splendore, Ald.
os. 410)
[The figure in Jonstonus is possibly that of the Godwit.]
Columba vulg. Livia, the common House-Pidgeon, or Culver,
I. 88. tab. 32. Ald. 2. 462. G. 245.
Columba Guttorosa perperam dicta Cropper, Ald. 2. 479.
Columbe Cypriz, Jacobins, I. 88. tab. 32. Ald. 2. 471.
Columbe Turcice, Coloris sunt Betulini, cum oculis rubris,
Ald. 481.
Columb. Tabellariz, Carriers.
Columb. Tremule, Shakers, suntq; vel acuti vel lati
caude.
Columb. Hirsutis pedibus, rough-footed Pidgeons, I. 88.
tab. 32. Ald. 2. 466.
Columb. Angl. & Russica, G. 245. inter has majores vocantur,
Runts.
Columb. Galeatze, Helmets.
[P. 175.] Columb. maculis nigris & aliw rubris decorate,
Black and red Spots.
Columb. Percussores, Smiters.
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 153
Columb. Gyratrices, Tumblers, Omnes he Columbe in
Columbariis aluntur preterq; has a curiosis educantur
Turcice, Barbarice, the Finikin, Cornew, Bastard bill, Light
Horsman, Dragoon.
Turtur, the Turtle Dove, I. 88. tab. 32. Ald. 2. 509. G. 277.
Palumbus major torquatus, a Ring Dove, or Quist, Ald. 2.
4.7. In sylvis, Turn. a Cowshot, a ringed Dove.
Oenas seu vinago, a Stock-Dove, or Wood-Pidgeon, Ald. 2.
499. I. 88. tab. 32.
Passer domesticus, the House-Sparrow, I. 92. tab. 34. G. 581.
Ald. 2. 534. idem quandoq; albus invenitur, I. ibid. Ald.
556.
Passer pusillus in Juglandibus degens, I. 96. sine Icone,
Aid. 2.563.
[A variety of Sparrow, cf. Belon (pp. 363 and 364), who terms
this bird “‘Moineau de Noyer,” or “ Friquet.” Charleton
(p. 78) calls it the “* Wall-nut Sparrow.’’]
Junco, the Reed Sparrow, I. 166. tab. 53. Hujus datur
minor species in Arundinetis prope Kingstoniam.
[The Reed-Bunting, cf. Turner (p. 103).]
Granivare Canore.
Carduelis, a Gold-finch, I. 69. tab. 36. Ald. 2. 801. G. 215.
Aurivittis Turn.
Calandra Ald. 2. 847. est Alaudz persimilis sed ipsa paulo
major, Ramis arborum insidet an Passer torquatus G. a Bunting.
[Cf. Willughby (p. 208), and Belon (p. 271). Aldrovandus
says it is called the “ Challander”’ in England. Emberiza
Callandra is the name applied to the Corn Bunting by
Linneus, cf. Syst. Nat., Ed. X., 1758.]
Coccothraustes, I. 98. tab. 37. Coccothraustes mas Ald.
2. 846.
[The Hawfinch. Though Merrett does not give the English
name the figure in Aldrovandus is unmistakable (cf. Belon,
p. 374).]
Fringilla, the Common, or Chaffinch, I. ib. Ald [Page 176.]
2. 817. G. 342. Turn. a Sheld apl. a Spink.
Monti-fringilla, the Bramble, or Brambling, I. 96. tab. 33.
Ald. 2. 822. G. 3438.
fe, 176: |
[The derivation of the word Brambling is obscure.
Charleton’s attempt is: “The Brambling, or Brier-finch
(utpote rubris scepe insidens, eorumg’ fructibus victitans)”’;
“rubris ’? = on brambles.]
154 BRITISH BIRDS.
Chloris, the Green-finch, I. ib. Ald. 2. 851. G. 226. Turn.
Acanthis, Spinus, Ligurinus.
Citrinella, the Yellow-hammer, I. 96. tab. 36. Ald. 2. 859.
Emberiza flava Turn. a Youlring, G. 591.
[Cf. Swainson (p. 69).]
Linaria, the Linet, I. 96. tab. 36. and 98. tab. 37. Ald. 2.
824. G. 550.
Luteola, a Siskin, rara apud Anglos avis nec uspiam fere
alibi quam in caveis cernitur semel in agris Cantabrigianis
se vidisse recordatur, Turn.
[Merrett’s account of this bird is taken verbatim from Turner
(p. 109), “‘ Caveis”” being Turner’s word for cages.] .
Alauda, the Lark, I. 98. tab. 37. 38. Ald. 2. 845. G. 67. Turn.
Galerita.
Alauda pratensis, the tit-Lark, I. ib. Ald. 2. 849.
Alauda cristata, the wood- Lark, Gl 72. Ald. 2. 841. I. 98.
tab. 37.
Rubicilla, a Bull finch, a Hoop, and Bul Spink, a Nope,
I. 120. tab. 43. Pyrrhula sive Rubicilla Ald. 2. 745. G. 662.
Baccivore.
Turdus vulg. the Song-Thrush, I. 98. tab. 37. Ald. 2. 600.
& Turn. a Thrussel.
Turdus Viscovorus, the Misletoe Thrush, or Saith, I. 102.
tab. 39. Ald. 2. 583. G. 688. & Turn. simpliciter, a Thrush.
[Willughby (p. 187) calls it the Missel-bird, or Shrite ; and
Charleton (p. 83) the Shreitch.]
Turdus Illas, the Wind Thrush, I. 102. tab. 39. Turdus
minor Ald. 2. 598. Turdus minor [las vel '_Tylas, G. 689.
Turn. a Wind Thrush.
[The Redwing. Turner does not call it a Wind Thrush, as
Merrett states, but a Wyngthrush (p. 173). The name Wind
Thrush is applied to the Redwing to this day in Somersetshire
(cf. Swainson, p. 5). ]
Trichas, the Feldefare, Turdus pilaris Ald. 596. [Page 177.]
tantum hyeme apud nos reperitur.
[The Fieldfare, cf. Willughby (p. 24).]
- Merula, Collyrion Turn. the Black-bird, or black Ousle, I.
104. 140. Ald. 2. 604. G. 543.
Sturnus vulg the Stare, or Starling, I. 104. t. 40. Ald. 2. 632.
G. 677. cirea turres & altiora edificiorum culmina.
Sturnus Cinereus, Ald. 2. 638. I. 104. t. 40.
[Probably the immature Starling.]
Ceruleo, a Clot Bird, a Smatch, or Arling, a Stone-check,
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 155
nidulatur in Cuniculorum foveis, & sub lapide in Anglia
Turn.
The Wheatear—also on p. 178 as Ginanthe. C/. Turner
(p. 53), Clot (bird) =Clod. Clod bird for clodhopper (cf.
Swainson, p. 10). The account of the Wheatear’s nesting in
rabbit burrows is derived from Turner (p. 53).]
Insectivore.
Picus viridis, the Green Wood pecker, or Hickwall, I. 110.
t. 41. Ald. 1. 849. G. 642. Chlorion, Virio, a Witwoll, Turn.
Picus varius major, I. 110. t. 41. Ald. 846.
Picus varius minor & mas, I. ib. Ald. 1. 847.
Picus murarius, the Creeper, or Wall-Creeper, I. ib. Ald.
1. 852. G. 644.
{Merrett distinguishes this bird from the Tree-Creeper,
which he refers to as “Certhia, the Ox-eye Creeper.”
Willughby (p. 143) says: “ They say it is found in England ;
but we have not as yet had the hap to meet with it.”’ Turner
does not mention the Wall-Creeper, but there is no reason
why Merrett should not be correct in including it in his list
of British birds (cf. Saunders’ Manual of British Birds, p. 119,
and Gilbert White’s VIIIth letter to Marsham, in Harting’s
second edition of the Natural History of Selborne). Charleton
(p. 86) calls this bird the ‘‘ Creeper, or Spider Catcher,” which
latter name Willughby also adopts.]
Picus Cinereus, I. 110. t. 41. Sitta seu Picus Cinereus Ald.
1. 853.
[The Nuthatch, cf. Willughby (p. 143). ‘‘ Gaza* retains the
same name, calling it ‘in Latina, Sitta. Later writers
style it Picus cinereus, v.e., the ash-coloured Woodpecker.”
Charleton calls it the “ Nut-breaker,” or “ Nut-jobber.”’].
Juynx, seu Torquilla, the Wryneck, I. 114. t. 42. Ald. 1.
866. G. 515.
[Charleton calls this bird the “* Wrynecken,” or “ Emmet-
hunter.’’]
Certhia, the Ox-eye Creeper, I. 114. t. 42. Ald. 2. 870. Certhia
Turn. G. 223.
[For explanation of name Creeper cf. Turner (p. 53).]
Passer Troglodytes, a Wren, I. ib. Ald. 2. 651. G. 588.
Trochilus, Senator, Regulus Turn.
Curruca, the Hedge Sparrow, G. 326. Ald. 2. 753. Hypolais
seu -Curruca, [.'122. t. 45.
* Theodorus Gaza, ob. 1480. The translator of Aristotle’s ‘‘ History
of Animals’’ into Latin from the original Greek.
156 BRITISH BIRDS.
Hirundo, the House Swallow, I. 114. t. 42. [Page 178.] Ald.
2. 662. G. 492. vivit per Hyemem in mineris stanneis Cor-
nubiensibus & in Rupibus marinis.
[‘‘ It lives during the winter in the tin mines of Cornwall,”
cf. Carew (Fol. 25).]
Hirundo Riparia, the Sand Martin, or Shore-bird, I. ib.
Ald. 2. 695. a bank Martnet, G. 508.
Hirundo agrestis sive Rustica Plinii, a Martin, Ald. 2. 693.
I. 114. t. 42.
Hirundo apus, a black Martin, or Martlet, Ald. 2. 699. I.
114. t. 42. a Rock or Church Martnet, G. 507.
[The Swift, cf. Willughby (p. 214.)]
Parus major, the Common Titmouse, I. 120. t. 43. Ald. 2.
713. G. 578. the great Titmouse, vel the great Ox-eye Turn.
[Cf. Turner (p. 131), and Swainson (p. 32).]
Parus Ceruleus minor, I. 122. t. 44. Ald. 721. G. 579. the
less Titmouse, Turn.
Parus ater, seu Carbonarius, the Coalmouse, I. ib. Ald. 2.
Was. Do:
[Cf. Willughby (p. 241) “ Cole-mouse.’’]
Parus Caudatus, the least, or long taild Titmouse, I. ib.
Ald. 2. 716. G. 580.
Motacilla, a Water Wagtail, I. 122. t. 44. Ald. 2. 727. G. 557.
Culicilega, a Wag tail, Turn.
Motacilla flava rostro longiusculo nigricante, I. 122. t. 44.
Ald. 2. 859. G. 559.
[Presumably the Yellow Wagtail (M. rai). The epithet
Longiusculus—somewhat lengthy, as applied to the beak is,
however, more descriptive of the Grey Wagtail (MM.
melanope).]
Rubetra, the Stone-Chatter, or Blackberry-eater, & Turn.
mortetter, I. 122. t. 45. Ald. 2. 740. a Moortiting Aquilonari-
bus.
[Cf. Turner (p. 159). Charleton also calls the Stone-Chat,
the ‘‘ Blackberry-eater, Morteller, or Black-cap.” For this,
and Moor-titing, or Moor-titling, cf. Swainson (p. 12).]
Rubecula, the Ruddock, Red-breast, and Robin Red-breast,
I. ib. Ald. 2. 742. G. 661.
Ruticilla, Pheenicurus, the Red-start, I. 120. 43. Ald. 2. '747.
a Redtail, G. 663. ex Turn.
[Gesner has “ Angli a redetale” (p. 699). According to
Charleton (p. 91), this bird possibly hibernated in England.]
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 157
Oenanthe, the Wheat ear, or White tail, I. 122. [Page 179.]
t. 45. Ald. 2. 763. G. 567. in agro Warwicensi Fallow Smiters.
[The Wheatear as Ceruleo (p. 177). Fallow Smiters—
Swainson (p. 9) has Fallow Smich; and in Wiltshire it is
known as the Horse Smatch, or Snatcher (A. C. Smith, Birds
of Wilts). Smiter possibly from Smit, SW. Smet, grease or
fat.]
Luscinia, Lusciniola, the Nightingale, I. ib. Ald. 2. 777. G.
532.
Morinellus, the Dotterel, Ald. 3. 540. G. 554. in agro Lincoln-
iensi certo anni tempore capitur jocose, vide Camden.
[The account of the taking of this bird given by Camden
(who apparently derived it from Caius, cf. Evans’ Turner,
p- 203), is as follows :—
‘** Dotterells, so named from their dotish foolishnesse, which
being a kind of birds as it were of an apish kind, ready to
imitate what they see done, are caught by candle light accord-
ing to foulers gesture: if he puts forth an arme, they also
stretch out a wing: sets he forward his legge, or holdeth up
his head, they likewise doe their: in briefe, whatever the
fouler doth, the same also doth this foolish bird, untill it be
hidden within the net ’” (Camden, Philemon Holland’s edition,
1610 (p. 548); cf. also Willughby (pp. 309, 310).]
Aquatice Palmipides.
Cygnus, the Swan, I. 136. t. 48. Ald. 3. 8. G. 321.
Anser Domesticus, the Goose, mas vocatur, the Gander,
I. 136, t. 48. Ald. 3. 102. G. 125.
Chenalopex, vulpanser, a Bergander, nusquam alias vidi
nisi in Thamesi fluvio aiunt tamen esse frequentem in insula
Tenia (Thanet.) vocaté & illic in scrobibus cuniculorum
nidulari, Turn.
[The Shelldrake. Turner (p. 25) says “ our people nowadays
name it Bergander”’ (7.e., Burrow-gander). Caius, however,
suggests quite another derivation for Berg, which he thinks
may be from Brend, or Bernd, meaning variegated (cf. Evans’
Turner, p. 195). Ray, apparently using the same idea, calls
the Goosander, a Bergander (p. 94).]
Anser ferus, I. 136. t. 48. Ald. 3. 150. G. 140.
Be rericalca, Capricalze Scotis, Ald. 3. 164. I. 136. t. 48.
. 146.
[The Capercailzie, also Urogallus (p. 173).]
Anseris speciem vidi in Cimelio Tradescanti sub nomine
Squeed una cum Ovo ex Insula Scotica Bass dicta, in qua
158 BRITISH BIRDS.
quam plurima avium genera stato anni tempore nidificant uti
etiam in insula Vecti.
[‘‘In Cimelio Tradescanti,” 7.e., the Tradescant Museum,
which was the origin and basis of the Ashmolean Museum at
Oxford. .‘‘Squeed”’ (?) not the Gannet which is mentioned
by Merrett on the same page. Possibly the Hider Duck is
meant, a few still breed on the-Bass.]
Bernicla Brenta, the Brant Goose, I. 136. t. 48 Ald. 3. 167. .
Brenthus, G. 95.
Gustarda Avis Scotica Ald. 3. 163. G. 145.
[The Great Bustard ; also p. 173. The name Gustard was
applied to the Great Bustard by Hector Boethius, or Boece
(1465-1536), the author of “‘ Scotorum Historie,” cf. Willughby
(p. 178), and Gray’s “‘ Birds of the West of Scotland ” (p. 248) :
‘* Besides these, we have another foule in Mers, more strange
and uncouth than all these aforementioned, called a Gustard,
fullie so great as a swan, but in colour of feathers and tast of
flesh little differing from a Partridge.’’]
Anser Bassanus, sive Scoticus, a Soland Goose, G. 145. ex
insula Bass non procul Edinburgo. |
[Cf. Evans’ Turner (p. 197). Soland Goose=the Gannet,
cf. Willughby (328).]
Anas Domesticus, the Duck, mas, the Drake, I. 142. t. 49.
Ald. 3. 188. Anas cicur, G. 83.
[Page 180.] Harle, the black Diver, I. 148. t. 49. a Shell
Drake in Norfolcia.
[For “ Harle,”’ as applied to the Red-breasted Merganser,
cf. Swainson (p. 164): “Shell Drake in Norfolk.” Swainson
(p. 163) gives Shell Duck as a name of the Goosander. The
figure in Jonstonus is possibly meant for the Merganser. ]
Anas fera, I. ib. Ald. 3. 222. G. 101. the Wild Duck.
Anas fera fusca, I. 142. t. 49. Ald. 3. 221. in Paludibus
Lincolniensibus.
[The figure in Jonstonus is possibly meant for the Scoter.
Merrett may here have meant the Pochard. Ray gives the
English equivalent as “ Pochard” (p. 96), and Charleton,
“the Red-headed Widgeon ”’ (p. 99).]
Anas Platyrhincus Ald. 231. in paludibus Crowlandiensibus,
I. 142. t. 49.
[The Shoveller. The figure in Aldrovandus is distinct.]
Querquedula, the Teal, I. 142. t. 49. Ald. 3. 549. G. 91.
A Gaddel, Ornithopolis nostris sic dictus est magnitudine
Anatis, rostrum simillimum rostro Querquedule, sed ali-
quanto magis cerulescit.
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 159
[The Gadwall, cf. Willughby (p. 374), where the name
Gadwall is seemingly used for the first time. The derivation
of Gadwall is obscure, cf. Newton “ Dict. Birds” (p. 297).]
Penelope major, the Widgeon, Ald. 3. 219. I. 142. t. 49.
Penelope fem, Ald. 3. 220.
Colymbus major, the great Ducker, I. 136. t. 48. Ald. 3. 252.
[The Great Northern Diver, cf. Willughby (p. 342), and
Swainson (p. 213).]
Colymbus a Norwegis Lumme, a nostratibus, Razor bill,
Worm, 304. ex Auctario Clus. pag. 367. Mr. Willoughby.
[Cf. “Museum Wormianum” (p. 304), and Willughby
(p. 342). The word “ Loom,” or “ Loon,” is applied to the
Divers in general (cf. Swainson, p. 213).]
Colymbus Cristatus seu Auritus, Worm, ib. sine Icone,
idem.
[Possibly the Great Crested Grebe.]
Colymbus medius, the Dive-dapper, or Arsfoot, I. 136, t.
45. Ald. 3. 258.
[Arsfoot, a name given to the Grebes on account of the
position of their legs (cf. Swainson, pp. 215, 216). So also
the Razorbill and Guillemot are known in Yorkshire as “ feet
in Ass.”’] |
Colymbus minimus, the Dab Chick.
[The Little Grebe (cf. Willughby, p. 340, and Swainson,
p. 216).]
Mergorum serrati-Rostratorum species major & minor,
in fluvio Tame in agro Warwicensi an. 1664. cum rigidissima
fuerit hyems, Mr. Willoughby.
[Probably the Goosander and Merganser, or the male and
female of one of these species (cf. Willughby, p. 27, and
Charleton, p. 95).]
Mergus Turn. (ut sentio) qui vidit in rupibus marinis nidifi-
cantes, juxta Ostium Tine fluvii [Page 181.] in Norfolcia,
Hoc me ditavit Doctissimus affinis meus Ds. Jenner Sclopeto
transfosso in agro Wiltoniensi.
[Turner’s Mergus is the Cormorant (cf. pp. 111, 113).]
Corvus aquat. the Cormorant, Ald. 3. 263. I. t. 27. Carbo
aquat. G. 121. in Cornubia Shags, Turn. mergus.
[The same as the above.]
Onocrotalus, sive Pelicanus, the Pelicane, I. 128. t. 46.
Ald. 3. 47.
[Pelicans were (1660-1670) kept in captivity in the Royal
160 BRITISH BIRDS.
Aviary in St. James’s Park (cf. Willughby, p. 327, and
Charleton, p. 94). Sir Thomas Browne, writing to Merrett
under date September 13th, 1668, says :—‘‘ In your Pinax
I find Onocratalus, or Pellican, whether you meane those at
St. James or others brought over or such as have been taken
or killed heere I knowe not. I have one hangd up in my
howse wch was shott in a fenn ten miles of about 4 yeares
ago and because it was so rare some conjectured it might
bee one of those which belonged unto the King & flewe away ”
(cf. Southwell, pp. 64 and 16).]
Pelicanus sive Platza, a Shovelard, I. 128. t. 46. ex agro
Lincoln. Turn. a Spoon bill.
[The Spoonbill, cf. Turner (pp. 151 and 41), and Willughby
(p. 288).]
Larus major & minor albus, the Sea Mew, I. 126. t. 46.
Ald. 3. 65. & simpliciter, Gul, Sea Gul, or Sea Cob.
[For “Sea Mew,” as applied to the Common Gull (L.
canus), cf. Swainson (p. 207). For “Sea Cob,” cf. Turner
(p. 79).]
Larus, quem Cornubienses indigitant, a Ganet, forsan
detorto nomine a Gavia vel a Gallicorum Gavian quod idem
sonat, est par Anseri, palmipes, rostrum rotundum ceruleum,
corpus grisei coloris, alte volat alausasq; minores solas
captat.
[No doubt one of the Skuas, probably the Great Skua (cf.
Willughby, p. 348). Merrett states that it catches “ alausas,”
by which he means pilchards, cf. p. 185, where the word is
spelt “ alosa.’’]
Puphinus Anglicus, the Puphin, G. 657. ex Insula Anglesey, &
Cornubia, Anas Artica Clusii, & Fraterculus Ald. 3. 230.
lin. 13, 14.
[C?. Turner, p. 205, and Carew, Fol. 35.]
Fissipides Aquatice.
Ciconia, the Stork, I. 148. t. 50. Ald. 3. 311. G. 230. raro hue |
advolat.
(Cf. Willughby (p. 286) for an account of the specimen
‘taken on the coast of Norfolk”? which he received from Sir
Thomas Browne. Writing to Merrett September 13th, 1668,
Browne states that he had seen two, “ one in a watery marsh
8 miles of, another shott whose case is yet to bee seen.’’]
Ardea Cineria, the Ash coloured Heron, or Hern, Hernshaw,
I. 148. t. 50. Ald. 3. 378. Ardea pulla sive Cinerea, G. 187.
[Cf. Swainson, p. 144.]
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 161
mraea alba, G. I. 152. t. 51. Ald. 390. G..189; a Mire
Drumble.
[This may either mean a white (albino) Heron, or the
Spoonbill, which Merrett has already mentioned. (Cf.
Turner, p. 39.) Merrett gives it the name “ Mire Drumble,”
which was in the form of Mire Drum, or Mire Drumble, com-
monly applied to the Bittern (cf. Willughby, p. 25, and
Century Dict., Vol. V.). Charleton, apparently following
Merrett, calls the Spoonbill a “ Mire-drumbel.”’]
Ardea stellaris, the Bittourn, I. ib. Ald. 405. G. 100.
[ Bittern, cf. Turner (p. 41), and Willughby (p. 25), where
we are told that its common name was “ Night-Raven.” (Cf.
Swainson, p. 146.)]
[p. 182] Ardea minor, I. tab. 56. quam ad me transmisit Ds.
Jenner, ex agro Wiltoniensi.
[Possibly the Little Bittern.]
Avis pugnax, I. 154. t. 52. a Rough, est tertia in Tab.
Avis pugnax, quarta in dicta Tab. a Reev. utreq; ex agro
Lincoln. est feemina superioris.
Hemantopus mas & fem. Red shanks, I. 154. t. 52.
Arquata, seu numenius, the Curliew, Ald. 3. 426. I. 152.
mol. G. 197.
Arquata congener, a Stone Curliew, huic rostrum breve,
accipitrinum, penne milvi, Phasiano par magnitudine,
Dilicatissimze avis ex agro Hantoniensi, Ds. Hutchinson
Ornithopola Londinensis.
[The Stone-Curlew was found in Hampshire (cf. Gilbert
White, XVth letter to Pennant), and still breeds in that
county.) ]
Vannellus, the Lapwing, bastard Plover, or Pewit, insula
queedam ab iis nomen fortitur in Essexia : Huc enim migrant
precise ad diem Divo Georgio sacrum, vide Fuller, 318.
f. 166. t. 53. Ald. 3. 526. G. 692.
[Cf. Turner (pp. 77 and 175). For accounts of this migra-
tion of the Pewet Gull on St. George’s Day to the promontory
of the Ness, or Naze, in Essex, cf. Charlton (p. 108), and Fuller,
“ Worthies of England ” (Vol. 1, p. 494) :—
“There is an island of some two hundred acres, near Har-
wich, in the parish of Little Oakley, in the Manor of Matthew
Gilby, esquire, called the Puet island, from Puets [Fuller was,
of course, referring to the Black-headed, or Pewet Gull, Larus
ridibundus| in effect the sole inhabitants thereof. Some
affirm them called in Latin Upupe, whilst others maintain
162 BRITISH BIRDS.
that the Roman language doth not reach the name, nor land
afford the bird. On Saint George’s Day precisely, they pitch
on the island, seldom laying fewer than four or more than
Six eggs.”
This mention of migration on St. George’s Day, April 23rd,
coincides with the fact that this is the day on which cattle
in Eastern Europe are shifted from winter to summer
pasture.
Vannello congener capella vulgari procerior, at Turdo minor,
pennis Ceruleis & crista longa, ex Cornubia Ds. Gunthorp.
[Smaller than a Thrush . . . with a long crest ? If minor
be a misprint for major, this is the Green Plover or Lapwing.]
Pluvialis cinerea, the Grey Plover, I. 166. t. 53. Ald. 3. 531.
G. 647.
Pluvialis flavescens hujus meminit, I. pag. 165. sine Icone.
Pluvialis vulg. the Whistling Plover, or green Plover, in
Ericeto Lincoln.
[This is the Golden Plover (cf. Willughby, p. 308; cf.
Southwell, p. 20).]
Rallus Itallorum, I. p. 147. Ald. 3. 98. utribique sine icone.
[One of the Rails.]
[Page 183.] Trynga Ald. 3. 814. I. 166. t. 53. juxta stag.
na Ichthyophylatica, & rivulorum margines, in agro War-
wicensi, Mr. Willoughby.
[The Sandpiper (cf. Willughby, p. 301).j
Trynga paulo minor, Ald. 3. 482. I. 166. t. 53. idem.
Merulam aquat. vidit volantem in Cumberlandia Ds.
Willoughby, Ald. 3. 486. I. 166. t. 53. .
[The Dipper, also on p. 171 as Cornix Aquaticus cf. Wil-
lughby (p. 149).]
Charadrios ab incolis, Sea Lark, in littoribus Cambrobritan-
nicis, preesertim in statione Belli Mauritii, I. 166. t. 53. Char-
adrios sive Hiatula, Ald. 3. 537. Ds. Willoughby.
[‘‘ Sea Lark,” cf. Willughby, p. 310. Probably the Dunlin,
or the Ringed Plover—possibly both (cf. Swainson, pp. 182
and 193).]
Grus, the Crane, I. 166. t. 45. Ald. 3. 329. G. 474.
PCj Purner, p: 497.4
Crex, a Daker Hen, est avis longis cruribus, cetera coturnici,
(nisi quod major sit) similis, que in segete & Lino, vere, &
in Principio estatis non aliam habet vocem quam crex, hane
enim vocem semper ingeminat, quam ego Arist. Crecem esse
puto, nusquam in Anglia nisi in sola Northumbria, vidi, &
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 163
audivi, & an sit eadem cum Ortygometra superius memorata
nescio, suspicor tamen esse Turn, me talem vidisse & audivisse
ad Wheatley quing ; Oxonio Milliaribus memini.
[Also on p. 73 as Ralla—a Daker Hen. The Landrail, or
Corncrake (cf. Turner, p. 71, and Willughby, p. 316). For
Daker Hen, cf. Swainson (p. 177). It is still called the
‘“Daker Hen” in Yorkshire and Lincolnshire.]
Tres sequentes: aves cum nominibus & breviusculis des-
criptionibus mihi communicavit Ds. Hutchinson Ornithopola
Lond. quas se vidisse ait in agro Lincoln.
[‘‘ Ornithopola,” = a dealer in birds.]
Non est avis aquatica querquedula paulo minor Rostrum
ei rotundum, tenue & argastum, superius paululum incur-
vatum, toto ventre albes- [Page 184.] cit, dorsum nigrum,
caput cristatum unde forsan ei nomen, sc. a monacha velata.
[“ Non est,” a misprint for “ Nun est,” as it appears in the
1666 edition. Merrett here, no doubt, refers to the Smew
(cf. Ray, Collection of English Words, p. 95). It is called the
Nun to this day (cf. Yarrell, Vol. IV., p. 499; Swainson,
p- 165).]
Crickaleel, est priori eequalis, Czerulea in alarum supernis,
caput collumq; maculata, ad ingluviem coloris grisei inde
deorsum albescit vel contra quoad ventris colorem.
[This may be the Garganey. “Crickaleel’’ may be onomato-
peic. The Garganey is known as the “Cricket Teal,” cf.
Swainson (p. 158), who states that from its cry it is known as
Cric Cric (Jura), Criquet (Savoy), Kriechentlein (Germany).
Sir T. Browne says :—‘‘ We have a kind of teale which some
fowlers call Crackling Teale” (cf. Southwell, p. 83).]
Gossander, palmipes & cristata ventre aureo, rostro longo
& angusto, caro flavescit & cocta tota facessit in oleum, non
est edulis, ex agro Lincoln. videtur esse Puphini species.
[Sir Thomas Browne’s comment on this note is:—‘“‘Gossander
videtur esse puphini species—worthy Sr that which we call
a gossander & is no rare foule among us is a large well colourd
& marked diving fowle most answering the Merganser. It
may bee like the puffin in fattnesse and Ranknesse butt no
foule is I think like the puffin differenced from all others by a
peculiar kind of bill” (Letter to Merrett, December 29th,
1668 ; Southwell, p. 72).]
OLD ENGLISH NESTING BOTTLES.
EARTHENWABRE bottles of the form shown in the accompanying
photograph were in common use on the barns and other farm
buildings in Kent and Sussex a century ago. They were put
up in rows under the eaves, and their object was to facilitate
the collection of the eggs and young of the House-Sparrows,
which were then universally destroyed, rewards being given
for them in every parish. Probably this custom was equally
common in other counties. Nesting bottles of this form may
be seen depicted on the ends of cottages in some of Morland’s
pictures. Some forty years ago they were comparatively
common in the part of Kent in which I live, but lately I had
some difficulty in finding any that were entire.
Only half of the back of the bottle was earthenware, half
NOTES. 165
being left open to admit the hand, while a small nick was
made in the upper half for the nail on which the bottle hung.
EK. G. B. MeapE-WaLpo.
BLACK REDSTARTS IN MERIONETH.
On August 23rd a pair of Black Redstarts (Ruticilla titys)
were seen at Tal-y-llyn, near Towyn, by Mr. H. N. Kirkby,
who watched them at close quarters for some time. The hen
bird was seen there again on the 30th of the same month.
The species is rare in North Wales, but has been recorded
three times previously in the same neighbourhood—in each
case a single bird (cf. Vert. Fauna N. Wales, p. 82).
H. KE. Forrest.
BLACK-HEADED WAGTAIL IN KENT.
A FINE male Black-headed Wagtail was shot at Fairfield,
Lydd, Kent, on June 8rd, 1908. It was taken by me to the
Natural History Museum, and identified as Motacilla flava
melanocephala. J. B. NicHozs.
GREAT GREY SHRIKE IN SCOTLAND.
In your last issue you mention twenty-two occurrences of
the Great Grey Shrike (Zanius excubitor) in Scotland during
the year 1907. Yet another specimen, unrecorded in that
list, was shot at Long Hope, in Orkney, in the November of
that year. H. W. Rosrnson.
[The Duchess of Bedford informs us that a female was shot
early in April, 1908, in the valley of the Palnure, two miles
from the place where one was seen in the previous autumn,
as recorded in Vol. I., p. 263.—Eps.]
TWO-BARRED CROSSBILL IN SUSSEX.
Ir may be interesting to record that a fine pair of Two-
Barred Crossbills (Loxia bifasciata) were shot together at
Penhurst, near Ashburnham, Sussex, on March 10th, 1908.
The cock is in fine red plumage, the hen in yellow. They
were seen in the flesh by Mr. W. R. Butterfield after being
sent to Mr. Bristow of St. Leonards. They are now in my
collection. J. B. NICHOLS
TUFTED DUCKS NESTING IN THE OUTER HEBRIDES.
In the references by MS. Marginal Notes in a copy of
MacGillivray’s “‘ British Birds,” the statement by Dr. C.
166 BRITISH BIRDS.
Gordon is clear enough in itself. Dr. C. Gordon was a personal
friend of MacGillivray. The repetition in my “Fauna of
the N.W. Highlands and Skye,” as regards their almost com-
plete disappearance for some years, is also correct, and was
upon the authority of personal investigations, and also upon
the authority of Mr. D. Guthrie, who, by the date of the
notes in “ The Annals,” 1896, pp. 3-22, had been some seven-
teen or eighteen years head-keeper to Sir Reginald Gordon
Cathcart, in South Uist. I quoted in the first instance from
the annotated copy of MacGillivray’s, which was lent to me,
but the second time from memory of the passage.
There appears to be little mystery—or none at all—in the
sequence of the accounts of the Tufted Ducks in the Outer
Hebrides. Dr. C. Gordon as early as 1851, when he dates his
marginal notes in the fifth volume of MacGillivray’s “ British
Birds,” spoke of the Tufted Duck as “‘ common and plentiful ”
in South Uist during the winter (vide Annals S.N. Hist., 1896,
pp. 3-22).
Mr. D. Guthrie, however, a most careful and capable
observer, reported this species as much scarcer in years
subsequent to 1892; and he had been resident in South
Uist at that time since about 1874. |
In 1893 actual record of nesting took place in South Uist, and
Mr. Guthrie verified some of his previous statements of its
doing so, and sent me an egg taken from a nest by himself.
Four pairs were known to breed in 1906, and one pair in 1907,
by Bahr and Kinnear. Mr. Guthrie also had spoken of the
Tufted Duck having been in unusual numbers in South Uist in
the winter of 1902-3.
J. A. Harviz-Brown.
DISTRIBUTION OF THE COMMON SCOTER IN
SCOTLAND.
WiruH reference to Mr. Harvie-Brown’s note (antea, p. 134)
on. the distribution of the Common Scoter in Scotland, it may
be of interest to state that a large flock of Common Scoters
was seen off the south end of the island of Graemsay, in
Orkney, during the first week in March this year.
With one exception, viz., a single adult male seen in com-_
pany with an old Goldeneye drake on the Loch of Harray,
among a large and widely scattered flock of Pochard drakes,
on the last day of February, 1905, this is the only time I,
personally, have come across the Common Scoter in Orkney
in winter. Whether they occur on and around the island of
Tiree in the Inner Hebrides I cannot say, but I spent the
NOTES. 167
greater part of three consecutive winters on this particular
island without seeing the species. However, they might
easily have been there for all that, as, owing to the local
lochmen being unwilling to go more than a quarter of a mile
from land, and then only in very calm weather, I was rather
handicapped as far as my observations of the sea Ducks were
concerned.
H. W. Rosinson.
PALLAS’S SAND-GROUSE IN CHESHIRE.
On or aboat the llth of June, 1908, two Sand-Grouse
(Syrrhaptes paradoxus) were observed in a field of roots at
Wythenshawe, Cheshire, by Mr. H. V. MacMaster. Their
plumage and ‘ pigeon-like”’ heads at once attracted his
attention, and he stood for some time at a distance of about
thirty-five yards from them watching them feeding. When
he approached a little nearer, one of the birds got up and
called ‘‘chack, chack,’ and then both flew away with
remarkably rapid and strong flight, which reminded him of
the flight of the Golden Plover, a bird which is common on
the Withenshawe fields in winter. Mr. MacMaster, though he
was struck with the long wings and tails of the birds when
they rose, is not prepared to say whether they were a
male and female.
T. A. Cowarp.
SUPPOSED BLACK GROUSE AND PTARMIGAN
FROM IRISH CAVES.
THE mistake over this subject in the ‘Irish Naturalist ’”’
(1899, pp. 17 and 37) has unfortunately been adopted in
British Brrps (antea, p. 127). As I pointed out in “ The
Birds of Ireland ”’ (p. 231), [had the able assistance of Mr. HE. T.
Newton and Dr. Forsyth Major, as well as of Dr. Scharff to
determine the humerus from the Ballynamintra Cave, in co.
Waterford, of which I was the finder. The conclusion arrived
at was that this bone agrees far more closely with that of a
common fowl, and as it was found in the superficial stratum,
I have no doubt it was brought in by a fox in recent times.
It can be seen in the Dublin Museum, where it is labelled
Gallus. Among the numerous bones of birds found by me
during the past eight years in the caves of Sligo, Clare and
Cork, and which Mr. E. T. Newton has kindly determined
for us, the Black Grouse is not represented, and I know of
no evidence that it: was indigenous in Ireland.
As regards the supposed bones of Ptarmigan, these also
168 BRITISH BIRDS.
were compared by Dr. Forsyth Major and Dr. Scharff with
bones of the several species of Grouse, and they were
found to agree better in some respects with those of Red
Grouse than with those of Ptarmigan. Some bones from
Kish Cave, co. Sligo, have been referred by Mr. E. T.
Newton to Red Grouse (?) or Ptarmigan (?). The former is
common in Ireland while the latter is unknown.
R. J. USSHER.
THE OYSTER-CATCHER’S METHOD OF FEEDING ON
THE EDIBLE MUSSEL.
THE systematic methods adopted by Oyster-catchers in
abstracting mussels from their shells are admirably detailed
by Mr. J. M. Dewar in the “ Zoologist ’”? for June.
It is somewhat surprising to find that no shells larger than
13 inches by % inch were found opened, while shells less than 1
inch by 4 inch were swallowed whole.
The larger shells are dealt with in a most methodical manner.
No attempt is made to attack them when their valves are
closed : hence, those left high and dry by the tide, or in rain-
water pools, are always passed over unmolested. The shell
must be more or less gaping to arrest attention. As everyone
knows who is familiar with mussel-scalps, these molluses
assume varied positions, sometimes presenting the ventral,
sometimes the dorsal border, uppermost, and sometimes one
end of the shell. And of these positions, shells with the dorsal
borders uppermost are most sought for, no less than 78 per
cent. of the empty shells left by Oyster-catchers having
occupied this position at the time of attack.
Each mussel is approached in the line of its long axis, and
generally, for some inexplicable reason, this approach is made
“from the front.” Should the shell be slightly gaping a
tentative tap is given, as if to ascertain whether the slit is
large enough for the beak to enter. If the experiment is
favourable, the beak is thrust home by a series of jerks,
forcible and rapid. When the blow is delivered a little to
one side, so as to force inwards a portion of one side of a
valve, more deliberation is displayed, which suggests that the
abstraction of the animal from its case is a matter of certainty,
the body being dragged out through the hole made, in spite
of the closing of the valves.
The author describes, in great detail, a number of methods
in the use of the beak as a lever, after it has once been thrust
down between the valves. These we cannot repeat, but it
should suffice to say that the simplest method employed is
NOTES. 169
to shake the beak violently from side to side till the valves
are laid open by the fracture of the adductor muscles.
Another method is to turn the beak through a quarter of a
circle, either by walking round the victim, or turning the head
in the neck. In yet another, the head is lowered almost to
the ground, and the point of the bill is thrust between the
valves ; the bird then moves its head to the left whereby the
two valves are forced apart.
Only about 9 per cent. of shells are opened through the
ventral borders, which may be accounted for by the fact that
this border is generally undermost. It is a noteworthy fact
indeed that these buried shellfish are found at all; often they
are discovered when buried by a layer of sand or mud as much
as an inch in depth. In their search for this buried treasure,
the bill is used as a sort of divining rod, the ground being
tapped here and there, until a victim is found.
Some 13 per cent. of shells are opened through their
posterior ends. Many buried shells are opened in this fashion.
Indeed, the author declares that this can be “ the only route
to the interior of the buried shells, the long axes of which are
vertical.” This statement, however, requires some qualifi-
cation, since he also contends that ‘‘ more mussels are opened
by way of the ventral borders when buried than when exposed
to view.”
Finally, Mr. Dewar contends that he has “‘ brought forward
observations which seem to prove that the Oyster-catcher,
far from being actuated by blind impulse, on the contrary
proceeds deliberately to remove certain structures (the
adductor muscles) which hinder the achievement of their
desires.”” It may be questioned whether this is not placing to
the credit of the Oyster-catcher a degree of intelligence which
it does not possess.
KILLDEER PLOVER IN KENT.
On April 21st, 1908, Mr. Bristow informed me that
he had seen the previous day three strange Waders
on one of the “ fleets ’’ in Romney Marsh, not far from
Lydd. He was not sure of their identity, but was
struck by their unusually long tails. The following
day all doubt was set at rest by the receipt of one of
them, which he at once brought to me in the flesh. It
was an adult specimen of the Killdeer Plover (gialitis
vocifera), and had been shot by a- shepherd at the place
where the three were seen. The second was shot on
170 BRITISH BIRDS.
April 21st, and the third on the 22nd, these I did not
see until after they had been mounted.
These are the first of this common American species
that have been killed in Kent, and bring up the British-
af ee Eine
Ben TS ‘
Killdeer Plover, shot near Lydd, Kent, on April 21st, 1908.
taken examples to six. One is now in the collection
of Mr. J. B. Nichols, and a second in that of Mr. C. J.
Carroll.
N. F. Tickwursr
[We are much indebted to Mr. J. B. Nichols for the
loan of his specimen, and for the permission to reproduce
the accompanying photograph of it.—EDs.] .
SOLITARY SANDPIPER IN KENT.
WirH reference to the Duchess of Bedford’s note in
the last number of BririsH Brrps (p. 136), the Solitary
Sandpiper was shot by a visitor at Littlestone, and
therefore at no great distance from where she saw it on
August 15th. Mr. Bristow received it two days later,
and kindly brought it to me in the flesh. From its
condition it had evidently passed unrecognised, and
it looked as though it had been shaken up ina “‘ game”
NOTES. 171
bag with other birds: it was soddened with blood and
melted fat, sand and sea-water, and so was a very sorry-
looking object, but its tail-feathers and axillaries gave
unmistakable proof of its identity.
I may, perhaps, draw attention here to the great
immigration of Waders that tock place on the Kent
coast at the end of July, of which the Duchess of
Bedford’s notes give evidence. Mr. M. J. Nicoll informs
me of Ruffs and other species seen by him about the
same time, and on the night of July 23rd, when at
Folkestone, I heard large numbers of Waders, chiefly
Sanderlings, passing over the town for two hours or
more.
N. FB. Tiensursr:
LATE NESTS OF THE GREAT CRESTED AND
LITTLE GREBES.
On August 12th I visited, with a friend, one of the Surrey
breeding haunts of the Great Crested Grebe, and we were
fortunate in discovering a nest containing four eggs, which
were only very slightly stained, and certainly had not been
incubated more than a week. I think it is somewhat ex-
ceptional to find eggs in the nest during August, as this species
does not appear to be double-brooded. That the Little Grebe
is so is well-known, but I think it worth recording that on
July 27th we found a nest with a fresh egg (another was laid
the next day) belonging to a pair of birds, which were accom-
panied by chicks not more than a day or two old.
A. G. LEIGH.
MarxkiInG Brirps.—Dr. Otto Herman, Director of the
Hungarian Central Bureau for Ornithology, informs us that
he has begun marking young Storks, Herons, Gulls and
Swallows, by means of an aluminium ring which is fastened
around the leg of the bird and bears the inscription
“ Budapest,” followed by a number which corresponds to the
entry in aregister book. Should anyone capture a bird so
marked he is requested to send the ring to the Hungarian
Central Bureau for Ornithology, Jozsef-korut, 65, Budapest
VIII., Hungary, accompanied by a notice stating the locality,
time and particulars of capture.
Birp-Lire 1x Dvusiin Bay.— Under this title Mr.
Alexander Williams gives an interesting account of the changes
in the sea and shore bird-life of the vicinity of Dublin during
the last twenty-five years (Irish Nat., 1908, pp. 165-170).
172 REVIEW.
How to Attract and Protect Wild Birds. By Martin
Hiesemann. Translated by Emma S. Buchheim, with an
introduction by Her Grace the Duchess of Bedford.
(Witherby & Co.) Illustrated. ls. 6d. net.
THE purpose of this little book is to set forth the methods
employed by the Baron von Berlepsch to provide suitable
nesting-places and food for various birds, and to protect them
from their enemies. Wonderful success has attended these
methods at Seebach, where exhaustive experiments have been
made for many years by Baron von Berlepsch. The
statement that “we can only preserve and increase our
birds by restoring . .... the opportunities for nesting
of which we have robbed them” is perhaps more applic-
able in Germany, where high forestry has robbed many
birds of nesting-places by the cutting down of decaying
trees and undergrowth, than it isin England. At the same
time the fact that the number of birds can be actually
increased by providing them with suitable nesting-
places is a most interesting one, and is sufficiently sub-
stantiated by the experiments here described. All our
readers are probably well aware of the value of nesting-boxes
as means of attracting such birds as Tits, Nuthatches and
Wrynecks, but we have never heard of Woodpeckers nesting |
in boxes in England as they do in Germany. This may be
due to the fact that old timber is much more plentiful
in this country, but we are inclined to think that if the
Berlepsch box were adopted under the conditions so carefully
described in this little book, even Woodpeckers would
be induced to nest in them. This nesting-box has been
designed and is manufactured with elaborate care. After
exhaustive experiments, the Baron made the most in-
teresting discovery that all the holes made by the various
species of Woodpeckers are formed on a uniform plan.
Special machines have at length been constructed to produce
“boxes”? which are faithful imitations of the Woodpecker’s
nesting hole down to the smallest detail, and the use of these
has met with remarkable success. Equally interesting are
the methods here described of pruning and growing bushes in
various ways to make them attractive to birds for nesting
purposes, and also of feeding birds in winter in the most
effective way at a minimum of cost. We may hope that the
methods here described will be adopted so universally that
people will compete as to how many nests they have in their
gardens rather than as to how many birds they have caught
or killed.
ISH
RDS
-ANTLUSTRATED: MAGAZINE
28 MONTHLY -ONE-SHILLING: NET
_- S96FIGIHIOLDORNINDON |
ie ¥f'
ede, BTS ray
é Oy
“a
i
* ~ }
re ee Sh Go
Pa. }
Yosh cy af ene. J
“EGGS OF PALAEARCTIC BIRDS.
A Work on this. subject, illustrated with BEAUTIFULLY.
COLOURED PLATES, is now being issued.
Write tor Full Prospectus and a Part for inspection to
WILLIAMS & NORGATE,
44, Henrietta Street, Covent Garden, London, W.C.
DALLMEYER'S
Naturalists’ Camera,
to07, MODEL,
For Telephoto or Ordinary LENSES.
DALLMEYER’S |
| Lenses are used: |
_ by the most
skilled Bird |
Photographers.
3 The following eae:
ey — Spectally. recomniended :
THE STIGMATIC SERIES II. F/6 (Convertible.)
THE SERIES D PATENT PORTRAIT LENSES F 6. rN
(A Rapid Long Focus Lens at a Moderate Price.) Y
‘High or Moderate Power Telephoto Lenses (Original Make).
We are Specialists in Cameras and Apparatus for Photo- Dentohow
CATALOGUES AND ADVICE FREE.
J. H. DALLMEYER, Limite, Enzi po,
Showrooms: a5, NEWMAN ae + We NEASDEN, LONDON, NW. | me) a
"WATKINS & DONCASTER, —
Waturalists,
And Manufacturers of CABINETS and APPARATUS for Entomology, Birds? ce aha (|
~vand. Skins, and all Branches of Natural. History.
A LARGE STOCK OF INSECTS, and BIRDS’ EGGS and SKINS, EN SS ;
Speciality :—Objects for Nature Study, Drawing Classes, &c.
BIRDS, MAMMALS, &c., PRESERVED and MOUNTED by FIRST-CLASS WORKMEN
TRUE TO NATURE.
All Books and Publications on: Natural History surpliea:
- 86, STRAND, LONDON, W.C. (Five Doors from. — cs.)
"Catalogue {102 pp.) ‘post Hee:
DRI | Sb DS
PoOrey BY’ WH. F. WITHERBY, FZ:5.,’ MB.0.U.
BoololLED BY W. P. PYCRAFT, ‘A:1.8; M.B.0.U.
ConTENTS OF NUMBER 6, Vou. II. NovEmMBER 2, 1908.
Some Early British Ornithologists and their Works, by
W. H. Mullens, m.a., tu.M., M.B.o.u. IV.—Martin
Martin (Ob. 1719) .. ; Page 173
Nesting Habits of the Marsh- Warbler, by Percy Lil Bunyard,
F.Z.S., M.B.O.U. 183
On the Down- Plumage and Mouth-Coloration of Some
Nestling Birds. by C. B. Ticehurst, M.A., M.R.C.S.,
LR. 0.P;, M.B.0:U. a 186
On the Mouth-Coloration of Some Nestling Birds, by
Annie C, Jackson .. 195
Notes on the Common Cuckoo in India, by Major Eig) AO
Magrath, M.B.0.U. .. : : 197
Notes :—Wood-Pigeon “ Diphtheria ” (Editors). “Barred
Warblers in Norfolk (E. C. Arnold and F. G. Penrose).
Yellow-Browed Warblers, Red-Breasted Flycatchers,
Bluethroats and other Birds in Norfolk (F. I. Richards).
Yellow-Browed Warblers in Yorkshire (Arthur R. Gale
and H. F. Witherby). A Sussex Rufous Warbler
(M. J. Nicoll). White Wagtail interbreeding with Pied
Wagtail in Devonshire (Amyas W. Champernowne).
Lesser Redpoll Nesting in Essex (Leonard Gray).
Breeding of the Crossbill in County Dublin (R.
Hamilton Hunter). Cirl Bunting Singing in October
(Chas. Oldham). Late Nest of the Kingfisher (Graham
W. Murdoch). Scops-Owl off Aberdeenshire (EK. R.
Paton). Honey-Buzzard in Shropshire (H. E. Forrest).
Grey Phalarope in Summer in Devonshire (Amyas W.
Champernowne). Nesting of the Common Snipe in Kent
(C. B. Ticehurst). Pectoral Sandpipiper and Bartram’s
Sandpiper in Kent (M. J. Nicoll). Pectoral Sandpiper in
Norfolk (E. C. Arnold). The Levantine Shearwater in
British Waters (H. F. Witherby). Short Notes a 199
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS
AND THEIR WORKS.
BY
W.-H -MULEMNS;) 4.5.6.0. 0.3.0.0;
IV.—MARTIN MARTIN
(Ob. 1719).
Tue islands of the Outer Hebrides have from an early
period attracted the attention of the traveller and the
174 BRITISH BIRDS.
naturalist. The romantic wildness of their situation,
their difficulty of access, and the strange manners and
customs of their sequestered population, have all
appealed strongly to the curious inquirer, and we thus
have a considerable mass of information concerning them
and, incidentally, their natural history, compiled at a
time when the fauna of far more accessible and perhaps
important districts remained neglected and unrecorded.
Far out in the wild Atlantic, over one hundred miles
from the mainland of Scotland, lies the lonely island of
St. Kilda, the ‘“ Hirta” of the ancients. Although
mentioned briefly by Joh. de Fordun (0b. circa, 1380)
in his ‘‘ Scoti-chronicon,”’ and by Boethius (1465-1536)
in the “ Scotorum Historia,” published in 1527, the first
detailed account we have of the Island of St. Kilda,
and certainly the first made from personal observation,
is that dealt with in the present article. It was prepared
by Martin Martin, a factor of the Clan Macleod, who in
the year 1697, in the summer season and “ to the almost
manifest hazard of the author’s life,” visited the island
in company with Mr. John Campbell, minister of Hawis.*
During Martin’s stay in St. Kilda, which extended over
three weeks, he devoted a certain amount of time to the
observation of the birds of the island, and amongst them
to the Garefowl, or Great Auk, and it is chiefly owing
to his description of this extinct and famous bird that
Martin’s book—curious and entertaining as it otherwise is
—is of such interest to the naturalist of the present day.
Of Martin Martin we know but little. He was born,
as we are told in the preface to his book, “ A late Voyage
to St. Kilda,” “‘in one of the most spacious and fertile
isles in the west of Scotland*; and besides his liberal
education at the University, had the advantage of seeing
foreign places, and the honour of conversing with some
* For further particulars as to the early history of St. Kilda, wide
Seton’s ‘St. Kilda, past and present.’ Edinburgh, 1 vol., 8vo,
MDCCCLX XXIII.
+ Possibly the Isle of Skye.
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 175
ot the Royal Society, who raised his natural curiosity
to survey the isles of Scotland more exactly than any
other”; . ... Martin took his degree of M.A. at the
University of Edinburgh in 1681, and subscribed his
name to the customary oath as ‘ Martinus Martin,”
and he seems to have died in 1719. In addition to his
voyage to St. Kilda, Martin also published a more
extensive work entitled “A Description of the Western
Islands of Scotland,’ London, 1703, 1 vol., 8vo, which
contains several short notices of the birds of the different
islands. This book the great Dr. Johnson had studied
before he made his tour to the Hebrides with the faithful
Boswell in 1773. There is a copy of this work in the
Advocates’ Library,* on the title page of which is
endorsed the following :—
“This very book accompanied Mr. Samuel Johnson
and me in our Tour to the Hebrides in Autumn, 1773.
Mr. Johnson told me that he had read Martin when he
was very young. Martin was a native of the Isle of
Sky, where a number of his relations still remain. His
book is a very imperfect performance ; and he is erroneous
as to many particulars, even some concerning his own
island. Yet as it is the only Book upon the subject
it is very generally known. I have seen a second edition
of it. I cannot but have a kindness for him notwith-
standing his defects.
16 April, 1774. JAMES BOSWELL.”
In Boswell’s “ Life of Johnson” we are told that the
“ great lexicographer ”’ was at first pleased to approve
of Martin’s work, but that afterwards he changed his
opinion and hurled at the unfortunate author one of his
ponderous bolts: ‘“‘ No man now writes so ill as Martin’s
‘Account of the Hebrides’ is written. A man could not
write so ill, if he should try.”’ Though surely poor
Martin had done his best to disarm hostile criticism by
informing us in his Preface that :—
“This (t.e., “The Natural History of °em’’) I had a
* Cf. Seton’s “‘ St. Kilda,” p. i8.
176 BRITISH BIRDS.
particular regard to in the following description, and have
everywhere taken notice of the Nature of the Climate
and soil, of the Produce of the places by sea and Land
. and that in such variety as I hope will make
amends for what Defects may be found in my stile and
way of Writing; for there’s a Wantonness in Language
as well as in other things... .”
A second edition of this book was published in London,
1716, “‘ very much corrected.”” To come, however, to
his more important work, the full title is as follows :—
A late / Voyage / to / St. Kilda, / The Remotest of all
the / Hebrides, / or / Western Isles of Scotland. / With /
A History of the Island, Natural, Moral, / and Topo-
graphical. Wherein is an Account .of their / Customs,
Religion, Fish, Fowl, &c. - As also a Rela- / tion of a
late Impostor there, pretended to be / Sent by St. John
Baptist. / By M. Martin, Gent. / London: / Printed for
D. Brown, and T. Goodwin: At the Black Swan and /
Bible without Temple-Bar; and at the Queen’s Head
against / St. Dunstan’s Church in Fleet Street.
MDCXCVIII.
1 Vol. 8vo.
Collation: 1 p. Short Title -+ 1 p. Title, reverse of
both blank, + pp. 2, Address, -+ pp. 4, Preface, -- pp. 4,
Contents, all unnumbered, +- pp. 158, map,* and plate
of two birds to face p. 53.
This, the first edition, of which a facsimile title page
is given opposite, is rare.
The second edition is said to have been published in
1716.
The fourth and best edition, which was reprinted in
Pinkerton’s ‘Collection of Voyages and Travels,” was
published in London in 1753. 1 Vol., 8vo.
This latter work, according to “The History of the
Works of the Learned,” Vol. V., was “ very agreeable
to the curious, especially to such as have any true taste
for natural and experimental philosophy.”
* A fac-simile of the map is reproduced on page 179.
AOE ATS
VOYAGE
Sc KILDA,
The ®Remotefe of all the
WEBRIDE S;
OR
Weftern Ifles of ScoTLanp.
WITH
A Hiftory of the Ifland , Natural , Moral,
and Topographical. Wherein is an Account of their
Cuitoms , Religion, Fifh, Fowl, Gc. As alfo a Rela-
fion ofa late 1MPOS TOR there, pretended to be
Sent by St. John Baprs/t.
By M. MARTIN, Gent.
Peat si aD tO
Printed for D Brown, and T. Goodwin: Atcthe Black Swan and
Bible without Temple-Bar ; and at the Queen's Head againft
St. Dunftan’s Church in Fleerfreet.. MDC XC VIII.
178 BRITISH BIRDS. |
The collation of the fourth edition is as follows :—
pp. 4 unnumbered -+ pp. 79. The last two wrongly
numbered 70 and 63 respectively. Frontispiece (a map
and figure of two birds).
Martin treats of the birds of St. Kilda in pp. 46-67
of the first edition, and in pp. 26-36 of the fourth, the
accounts in both editions being nearly identical.
Amongst the land birds he enumerates :—
‘“* Hawks extraordinary good, Eagles, Plovers, Crows,
Wrens,* Stone-Chaker, Craker, Cuckoo.”
Of the sea fowl, however, as may be expected, he gives
us a fuller description ; and he thus commences it with
his historic description of the Great Auk :—
‘The Sea-Fowl are, first, Gairfowl, being the stateliest
as well as the largest Sort, and above the size of a Solan
Goose of a black colour, red about the Eyes, a large white
spot under each, a long broad Bill; it stands stately,
its whole Body erected, its wings short, flies not at all ;
lays its egg upon the bare Rock, which if taken away,
she lays no more for that Year; she is whole-footed,
and has the hatching Spot upon her Breast, 7.e. a bare
spot from which the Feathers have fallen off with the
Heat in hatching; its Egg is twice as big as that of a
Solan Goose, and is variously spotted Black, Green,
and Dark; it comes without regard to any Wind,
appears the first of May, and goes away the middle of
June.” t |
Martin further records the fact that the inhabitants
of St. Kilda made use of ‘“‘the Bones, Wings, and
Entrails of their sea-fowls”’ to add to the composts of
straw and ashes with which they manured their lands,
and this and the fact that they consumed the eggs and
flesh of the Garefowl may have contributed to its
* The list of Land birds is given as it stands, and it will be noted
that though Martin mentions the Wren, he does not describe it.
7 This quotation is from the fourth edition, the description of the
Gair-fowl in the first edition is almost word for word the same, but a
trifle more obscure, and has the amplification, “he is Palmipes, or
whole-footed.”’
°F
tau
v. |
ech Ie Zod
7?
Fr
Se
f? a7?
g
ou
De .
eH
180 BRITISH BIRDS.
extermination (cf. Symington Grieve, The Great Auk,
London, 1885, 1 Vol., 4to, pp. 76 and 119).
Robert Gray, in his invaluable work, ‘“ The Birds of
the West of Scotland ” (Glasgow, MDCCCLXXI., 1 Vol.,
8vo), p. 442, says, “It is, I think, doubtful whether
Martin ever saw the bird, as in another and larger work
entitled, ‘A Description of the Western Islands of
Scotland,’ published five years afterwards, and in which
he gives a full account of St. Kilda and its birds, he does
not even mention it, but it should be noted that the
description of the birds in this book is not in any way
so complete as that in the same author’s ‘A late Voyage
to St. Kilda.’ ”’
In this work Martin gives a considerable account of
the Solan Goose, and amongst other curious statements,
tells us :—
“The Solan Geese are always the surest sign of Her-
rings, for where-ever the one is seen, the other is always
not far off. There is a Tribe of Barren Solan Geese
which have no Nests, and sit upon the bare Rock ; these
are not the Young Fowls of an Year old, whose dark
colour would soon distinguish them, but old ones, in all
things like the rest; these have a Province, as it were,
allotted to them, and are in a separated state from the
others, having a Rock two hundred Paces distant from
all other; neither do they meddle with, or approach to
those Hatching, or any other Fowls; they sympathize
and Fish together ; this being told me by the Inhabitants,
was afterwards confirmed to me several times by my
own observation ”’ (Ist ed., p. 52).
And of the Fulmar :—
‘And when the young Fulmar is ready to take Wing,
he being approached, ejects a quantity of pure Oyl out
at his Bill, and will make sure to hit any that attacks
him, in the Face, though seven Paces distant . . . . but
the Inhabitants take care to prevent this by surprizing
the Fowl behind, having for this purpose a wooden dish
fixed to the end of their Rods, which they hold before
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 181
his Bill as he spouts out the Oyl; they surprize him also
from behind by taking hold of his Bill, which they tie
with a thread, and upon their return home they untie
it with a Dish under to receive the Oil... .” (p. 56,
op. cit.).
Among his observations on the nesting habits of the
sea birds the following passage may be quoted :—
“Every Fowl lays an Egg three different times
(except the Gair-fowl and Fulmar, which lay but one) ;
if the First or Second Egg be taken away, every Fowl
lays but one other Egg that Year, except the Sea-Malls,
and they ordinarily lay the Third Egg, whether the First
and second Eggs be taken away or no ”’ (p. 64, op. czt.).
The supply of sea-fowl was of course a most important
factor in the life of the island, and Martin computed the
consumption of Gannets alone as follows :—
‘We made particular Enquiry after the number of
Solan Geese consumed by each Family the Year before
we came there, and it amounted to Twenty two thousand
five hundred in the whole Island, which they said was
less than they ordinarily did, a great many being lost by
the badness of the season, and the great Current into
which they must be thrown when they take them, the
Rock being of such an extraordinary Height, that they
cannot reach the boat” (p. 115, op. cit.).
Only the briefest notice can here be made of the
manners and customs of the inhabitants of St. Kilda,
“of their dexterity in climbing,” in which “‘ custom had
perfected them, so that it is become familiar to them
almost from their cradles ; the young boys of three years
old begin to climb the walls of their Houses ”—“‘ of the
beauty of their voices and the soundness of their lungs,”
to which “‘ the Solan Goose Egg supp’d Raw doth not a
little contribute.’’ How they possessed but one steel and
tinder-box among a population of one hundred and
eighty souls ; and how their native ignorance alone pre-
vented them from being the most fortunate of mankind.
‘There is this only wanting to make them the Happiest
182 BRITISH BIRDS.
People in this Habitable globe, viz., That they themselves
do not know how happy they are, and how much they
are above the Avarice and Slavery of the rest of
mankind.”
Enough perhaps has been quoted to show the nature
of this somewhat rare and curious book, the precursor |
of many others dealing with St. Kilda and the Scottish
Islands. Among which may be mentioned the Rev. A.
Buchan’s ‘“ Description of St. Kilda, the most remote
Western Isle of Scotland,’ published in Edinburgh,
1741; the Rev. Kenneth Macaulay’s ““ A Voyage to and
History of St. Kilda,” London, 1764; an anonymous
work entitled “A Voyage to Scotland, the Orkneys and
the Western Isles of Scotland,’ London, 1751; and the
‘** Travels in the Western Hebrides: from 1782 to 1790,”
London, 1793, by the Rev. John Lane Buchanan [in no
way to be confounded with George Buchanan (1506-1582),
the Scotch historian], which last work affords us the
pleasing statement that :—
“The Gare Fowl is four feet long, and supposed to
be the pigeon of South America.”’
And so farewell to Martin Martin; would that he had
noted more of what he saw in St. Kilda when he set out
for that almost “ unknown land,” having, as he tells us,
““embark’d at the Isle of Esay in Hawies the 29th of
May, at six in the Afternoon, 1697. The Wind at 8.E.”
ce 1854
NESTING HABITS OF THE MARSH-WARBLER.
BY
PERCY F. BUNYARD, F.z.s., M.B.0.U.
Mr. WarDE Fow.er has described* the nesting habits
of the Marsh-Warbler (Acrocephalus palustris) so ad-
mirably that perhaps little that is new can be added
to his observations. Nevertheless, the bird is so rare
as a breeding species in this country that a short account
of my experiences with two pairs this summer may be
of interest. On June 26th I received a telegram from
a friend in Somersetshire to say that he had found a
nest with eggs, and had also another pair of birds under
observation. In the hope of hearing the birds singing
we were on the spot where the nest had been located
(elevation 500 ft. above sea-level) just after sunrise, but
only heard a few notes during a wait of some few minutes.
My companion then took me to the nest, which was
situated in a broad, rough, overgrown hedge (composed
of whitethorn and elder) on the side of a lane, and
bordering a field of wheat. The nest was on the field side
of the hedge, about three feet from the ground, and was
beautifully concealed (a good deal of herbage was removed
for the purpose of photographing). The nest was sup-
ported by two stems of bracken, and one of stinging nettle,
round which the nest had been built. This nest resembled
in general appearance that of a Whitethroat much more
than that of a Reed-Warbler. It was loosely constructed
on the exterior, and the interior was well and evenly lined.
The materials used in the exterior were rather coarse grass,
two pieces of frayed-out cotton, and one small feather
(possibly from one of the birds). Finer grass was used
as the linmg was approached, and this was composed of
* « Zoologist,’’ 1906, pp. 401-9.
184. BRITISH BIRDS.
fine fibrous roots, a single flowering head of grass (still
green), and a very little horsehair. The outside measure-
ments of the nest were: depth, 34 in.; diameter, 4 in.,
extending to 5 in. where the nest was built round the stems
of the supports, tapering downwards to the centre almost
Nest of Marsh-Warbler in Somerset, J une 28th, 1908.
to a point ; interior diameter, 2 in.; depth, 14 in. This
nest was originally located on June 10th by watching the
birds building, and at the time of my visit, June 28th,
it contained four eggs in an advanced state of incubation.
They are quite typical, and cannot be confused with the |
P.F.BUNYARD: NESTING OF MARSH WARBLER. 185
egos of the Reed-Warbler, and indeed I have not yet seen
well-authenticated eggs of the Marsh-Warbler which could
easily be mistaken for the eggs of the Reed-Warbler.
The British-taken eggs of A. palustris appear to me rather
larger and less pointed than Continental eggs, and it would
be interesting to know if others have noticed this. I
re-visited this nest about 11 a.m. for the purpose of taking
the photograph here reproduced. The bird was sitting, but
slid off quietly on my approach, and although I remained
in the vicinity of the nest (in the hope of getting a
photograph of the bird itself) for nearly two hours, the
alarm-note was only uttered once, and the birds were
nowhere to be seen. I was disappointed in not seeing
and hearing more of the birds, and their extreme shyness
and quietness struck me more than anything in con-
nection with this interesting experience.
On the evening of the same date we visited a small
osier bed (150 ft. above sea-level) in which some other
Marsh-Warblers had been previously located, and after
watching for some time we saw the birds continually
diving down among the rough growth near a large plant
of the cow-parsnip, in which we afterwards found a nest
containing five newly-hatched young. This nest was
supported by three stems of the plant, and was similar
to the one just described. The mouths of the young
were of a beautiful rich lemon-yellow, and on the back
of the tongue were two conspicuous black spots, placed
horizontally.
( 186")
ON THE DOWN-PLUMAGE AND MOUTH-
COLORATION OF SOME NESTLING BIRDS.
BY
C. B. TICEKHURST, M.A... M:B.C.S., “L:E.C.P:, M:B207u:
OF all the books which have been written on British birds
not one, as yet, has dealt satisfactorily with the question
of the sequence of plumages and, so far as I know, none give
even the barest description of the down or natal plumage of
even our commonest birds.
Mr. Pycraft deplored this fact, and in the course of two
excellent articles (vide antea, Vol. 1, pp. 102 and 162) gave a
brief outline of the different kinds of down-plumage recognis-
able, and made some remarks upon their significance, at the
same time suggesting that further investigation into the
matter would be valuable.
The sequence of plumages is a study which has long
interested me; and I am certain that the collection of a large
amount of material in reference to this subject, as well as on
the coloration of the mouths of nestlings, as suggested by
Mr. Pyeraft (cf. Vol. I., p. 129) would, when worked out on
comparative lines, yield some important results relating to the
question of morphological ornithology.
As Mr. Pycraft has already explained (cf. Vol. I., p. 162)
the different types of down, I shall here only state that in
all the Passerine birds which I have examined, the type of
down present is that of the pre-penna, and belongs to the
mesoptyle generation. These pre-penne, I need hardly
remark, are not distributed all over the body, but are arranged
in definite tracts. Further, the development of the pre-penne
in these tracts varies considerably in different genera, and
even in the different species of the same genus.
The inner supra-orbital tracts consist of few pre-pennz which
are situated above the eye on each side, and from thence
i
C. B. TICEHURST: DOWN-PLUMAGE. 187
pass backwards, each tract forming, in most species, a line
or crescent of down. It will be noticed that the inner supra-
orbital tracts are present in every species which I have
examined which has down at all.
The outer supra-orbital tracts consist of two or three small,
short pre-pennz on each side, situated between the edge of
the upper eyelid and the inner supra-orbital tract. They are
‘present in the Mistle-Thrush, Meadow and Red-throated
Pipits, Chaffinch, and Brambling.
The occipital tracts consist of two or three fairly large,
well-developed, pre-penne situated on each side of the occiput.
Oufer y
supraorbita/.
tract 7, S
$3 a Eye
Oa ¥, =a Inner, »
orbital
oe ii tract
Occipital Se
pr act Humeral tract
~.¥
° wae
= ae
ve . oa® e
. 5 .
Nie, ca .
oe
Piste %
Sera
mitals A
are r oe
ree a oe SeKelie), e
ESS KS cee *.
“a fy ° wae au) “
2 ane tig °
. 4 -". sept go wets ie
on oe
i 2
(Yaz) Femoral!
Crurat tract
Ventra! Crural
tract tract
Diagram showing the Down-tracts of Nestling Birds.
The two tracts usually form a line, or crescent, of down when
well developed. They are present in every species examined
which has any down.
The humeral tracts are usually well developed, and run
obliquely downwards and outwards from the base of the neck
across each humerus just in front of the shoulder joint. They
are replaced by the “scapular” feathers of the juvenile
plumage. They are present in all the birds that I have
examined which have down, except the Wren (see note under
this species).
The spinal tract runs down the centre of the dorsum from
about the level of the shoulder joint to the end of the sacrum
in those species in which it is well developed. The length
188 BRITISH BIRDS.
varies in different species, in some the anterior part being
slightly developed or absent, in others the posterior part.
The breadth is greatest in the lumbar region. This tract is
present in all species examined except the Blue Tit (see note
under this species).
The ulnar tracts consist of small pre-pennze on the ulnar
margin of each wing. Each pre-penna is replaced later by
the secondaries, and in some cases by the secondary coverts.
These tracts are absent in the Wheatear, Robin, all four Tits,
and Wren.
The femoral tracts are situated laterally on each side just
beneath the femur. The pre-penne never seem to be long,
and are more closely approximated to each other than in some
of the other tracts. This tract is absent in the Thrushes and
Robin, the Tits, Swallow, and Sand-Martin.
The ventral tract is situated laterally on each side of the
abdomen, and runs obliquely from the middle line towards
the upper end of the femoral tract. In character it resembles
the femoral tract, and is widest posteriorily. This tract is
present in the Meadow-Pipit, Starling, and in all the Fringilline
examined which have down.
The crural tract consists of a few small inconspicuous pre-
penne forming a circle round the lower end of the crus, just
above the ankle joint. It was noted in the Red-throated
Pipit, all the Fringillince examined which have down, and
in the Snow-Bunting.
I am indebted to my friend, Mr. J. L. Bonhote, for notes
or specimens of the Bearded Tit, Red-throated Pipit, Tree-
Sparrow, Brambling, Lesser Redpoll, Snow-Bunting, and
Kingfisher.
MISTLE-THRUSH Twurdus viscivorus L.
Down. Colour.—Greyish white, some pre-penne having
buffish white tips.
Distribution.—Inner and outer supra-orbital, occipital,
humeral, spinal and ulnar. In some there is a pre-penna
on the bastard wing. The outer supra-orbital tract is not
found in the Blackbird or Song-Thrush.
COLORATION OF Movutu. Inside, orange; no spots; ex-
ternally, flanges lemon-yellow.
SONG-THRUSH Turdus musicus L.
Down. Colouwr.—Buffish white.
Distribution.—Inner supra-orbital, occipital, humeral, spinal
and ulnar.
CoLoRATION OF Mourn. Inside, orange; no spots; flanges
lemon-yellow.
——
C. B. TICEHURST : DOWN-PLUMAGE. 189
BLACKBIRD Turdus merula L.
Down. Colour.—Greyish white.
Distribution.—Inner supra-orbital, occipital, humeral, spinal
and ulnar.
CoLoRATION OF MoutuH. Inside, orange; no spots.
WHEATEAR Sazicola enanthe (L.).
Down. Colour.—Dark grey.
Character.—Moderate length.
Distribution.—Inner supra-orbital, occipital, humeral, spinal
and femoral. It will be noted that there is no ulnar tract,
and the spinal tract is a very short one, confined to the
middle of the dorsum.
CoLoRATION OF MoutH. Inside, orange ; no spots.
REDBREAST Erithacus rubecula (L.).
Down. Colour.—Dull jet-black.
Distribution.—Inner supra-orbital, occipital, humeral, and
spinal. Here also there is no ulnar tract, and the short
spinal tract does not reach the sacrum.
CoLORATION OF MoutuH. Inside, orange; no spots.
WHITETHROAT Sylvia cinerea Bechst.
Down. Absent.
CoLORATION OF Movutu. Inside, yellowish orange; one
brownish black spot at the base of the tongue on each
side.
LESSER WHITETHROAT Sylvia curruca (L.).
Down. Absent.
CoLORATION OF Mourn. Inside, orange. Tongue spots as in
S. cinerea.
GARDEN-WARBLER Sylvia hortensis (Bechst.).
Down. Absent. —
CoLoRATION OF Movutu. Inside, deep pink with a violet
tinge ; one brownish oval spot on each side of the base of
the tongue.
N.B.—The absence of down in these three species of the genus
Sylvia is noteworthy.
HEDGE-SPARROW Accentor modularis (L.).
Down. Colour.—Greyish black.
Character.—Fairly long, and well developed.
Distribution.—Inner supra-orbital, occipital, humeral, spinal,
ulnar and femoral.
190 BRITISH BIRDS.
CoLoratTion oF Mout. Inside, orange. A _ black spot
on each spur of the base of the tongue, and another,
brown and more diffuse, situated subterminally. The
latter disappears completely 4-5 days after the chick
is hatched, which accounts for the fact that it was not
noted by Mr. Pycraft (cf. antea, Vol. I., p. 130).
BEARDED TITMOUSE Panurus biarmicus (L.).
Down. Absent. (N.B.—Spirit specimen.)
GREAT TITMOUSE Parus major L.
Down. Colour.—Whitish grey.
Character.—Moderate in length but scanty, a few pre-pennz
only in each tract.
Distribution.—Inner_ supra-orbital, occipital, humeral and
spinal.
CoLoraTION OF Movutu. Inside, lemon-yellow; no tongue
spots.
COAL-TITMOUSE Parus ater L.
Down. Colour.—Greyish.
Character.—Moderate in length but very scanty, consist-
ing of a few pre-penne only in each tract.
Distribution.—Inner supra-orbital, occipital, humeral, and
spinal.
CoLorATION OF Mouru.—Inside, orange; no tongue spots ;
externally, flanges lemon-yellow.
MARSH-TITMOUSE Parus palustris I.
Down. Colour.—Grey.
Character.—Rather short in length, and very scanty,
consisting of a few pre-pennz only in each tract.
Distribution.—Inner supra-orbital, occipital, humeral, and
spinal.
CoLORATION OF MoutuH. Inside, orange; no tongue spots.
BLUE TITMOUSE Parus ceruleus L.
Down. Colour.—White.
Character.—Moderate in length but very scanty, consist-
ing of a few pre-penne only in each tract.
Distribution.—Inner supra-orbital, occipital, and humeral.
CoLoRATION OF Mourn. Inside, lemon-yellow; no tongue
spots ; externally, flanges lighter yellow.
N.B.—It is possible that the scanty pre-penne which form
the spinal tract may have been rubbed off in those in-
dividuals which I examined; if not, the absence of that
tract in this species is worthy of note.
C. B. TICEHURST : DOWN-PLUMAGE. 191
WREN Troglodytes parvulus K. L. Koch.
Down. Colour.—Greyish black.
Character.—Scanty.
Distribution.—Inner supra-orbital, occipital and spinal.
CoLORATION OF Moutu. Inside, yellow; no tongue spots ;
externally, flanges lemon-yellow.
N.B.—Since this is the only species in which I have noted
the absence of the humeral tract, it is possible that it is
slightly developed but had become rubbed off in the
nest.
PIED WAGTAIL Motacilla lugubris Temm.
Down. Colour.—Grey.
Character.—Moderate in length.
Distribution.—Inner supra-orbital, occipital, humeral, spinal,
ulnar and femoral.
CoLorATION OF Mourn. Inside, yellow; no tongue spots ;
externally, flanges very pale yeliow.
MEADOW-PIPIT Anthus pratensis (L.).
Down. Colour.—Whitish grey.
Character.—Moderate in length.
Distribution.—Inner and outer supra-orbital, occipital,
humeral, spinal, ulnar, femoral and ventral, the last being
very scanty.
CoLORATION OF MoutuH. Inside, deep pink ; no tongue spots ;
externally, flanges orange. |
RED-THROATED PIPIT Anthus cervinus (Pall.).
Down. Colour.—Greyish black.
Character.—Long ; femoral and crural tracts scanty.
Distribution.—Inner and outer supra-orbital, occipital,
humeral, spinal, ulnar, femoral and crural.
N.B.—As I only had a spirit specimen to examine it is possible
that the ventral tract, which in the Meadow-Pipit is only
slightly developed, may have been overlooked.
»
SWALLOW Airundo rustica L.
Down. Colour.—Grey.
Character.—Fairly long. Tracts scanty.
Distribution.—Inner_ supra-orbital, occipital, humeral and
Spinal.
CoLORATION OF Movutu. Inside, lemon-yellow; no tongue
spots; externally, flanges whitish.
192 BRITISH BIRDS.
SAND-MARTIN Cotile riparia (L.).
Down. Colour.—Gray, rather darker on the humeral tract.
Character.—Rather short, scanty.
Distribution.—Inner supra-orbital, occipital, humeral, spinal
and ulnar. On the last two very scanty. Prepenne of
ulnar tract present on the secondary coverts.
CoLorATION OF Movutu. Inside, lemon-yellow; no tongue
spots; externally, flanges lemon-yellow.
GREENFINCH Ligurinus chloris (L.).
Down. Colour.—Greyish white.
Character.—Medium length, sparse on the crural and ventral
tracts.
Distribution.—Inner supra-orbital, occipital, humeral, spinal,
ulnar, femoral, ventral and crural.
CoLoraTION OF Movutu. Inside, deep crimson, no tongue
spots ; externally, gape white, beak horn colour with a
yellowish tint.
HAWFINCH Coccothraustes vulgaris Pall.
Down. Colour.—Snow-white.
Character.—Long and plentiful.
Distribution.—Inner supra-orbital, occipital, humeral, spinal,
ulnar, femoral, ventral and crural.
CoLorATION OF Mourn. Inside, violet pink; no tongue
spots; externally, flanges yellowish orange and whitish
at the angles. The bill during the first two days is not
markedly large, but it rapidly grows in size.
HOUSE-SPARROW Passer domesticus (L.).
Down. Absent.
CoLORATION OF Movutu. Inside, yellow; no tongue spots ;
externally, flanges lighter yellow.
TREE-SPARROW Passer montanus (L.).
Down. Absent.
N.B.—Taking into consideration the development of the down
in the other Fringilline the absence of it in the genus
Passer is a most remarkable fact.
CHAFFINCH Fringilla celebs L.
Down. Colour.—Greyish.
Character.—Moderate in length and quantity.
Distribution. —Inner and outer supra-orbital, occipital,
humeral, spinal, ulnar, femoral, ventral and crural.
C. B. TICEHURST : DOWN-PLUMAGE. 193
CoLORATION OF MovutH. Inside, violet red, but the hard
palate is orange ; no tongue spots ; externally flanges white.
BRAMBLING Fringilla montifringilla L.
Down. Colour.—White.
Character.—Length moderate, well developed, except on the
crural tract.
Distributton.—Inner and outer supra-orbital, occipital,
humeral, spinal, ulnar, ventral, femoral and crural. Pre-
penne of the ulnar tract are attached to the secondaries
only. Ventral tract well marked at the posterior end.
(N.B.—From spirit specimen. )
LESSER REDPOLL Linota rufescens (Vieill.).
Down. Colour.—Greyish.
Character.—Long ; ventral and crural tracts scanty, pre-
penne on the secondaries only make up the ulnar tract.
Distribution. — Inner supra-orbital, occipital, humeral,
spinal, ulnar, femoral, ventral and crural.
CoLoRATION OF MoutH. Inside, carmine; no tongue spots;
externally, gape white, a carmine spot at angle of gape due
to colour of inside showing through.
BULLFINCH Pyrrhula europea Vieill.
Down. Colour.—Blackish grey.
Character.—Abundant and long.
Distribution. — Inner supra-orbital, occipital, humeral,
spinal, ulnar, femoral, ventral and crural. Pre-penne of
the ulnar tract are present on the secondaries and their
coverts.
CoLorATION OF Moutu. Inside, violet red, no tongue spots ;
externally, flanges whitish.
SNOW-BUNTING Plectrophenax nivalis (L.).
Down. Colour.—Dark grey.
Character.—Fairly long, spinal tract thicker anteriorly than
posteriorly, crural very scanty and minute, the other tracts
well marked.
Distribution. — Inner supra-orbital, occipital, humeral,
spinal, ulnar, femora! and crural.
CoLoRATION OF Movutu. Inside, not noted; externally,
gape yellow ; beak yellow.
STARLING Sturnus vulgaris L.
Down. Colour.—Greyish white, a shade darker on the head,
Character.—Fairly long and plentiful.
194 BRITISH BIRDS.
Distribution. — Inner supra-orbital, occipital, humeral,
spinal, ulnar, femoral, and ventral. Spinal tract long and
well marked. Ventral tract scanty and not well marked.
CoLoRATION OF Mout. Inside, orange; flanges very broad
and lemon-yellow in colour; no tongue spots; gape huge;
externally, flanges lemon-yellow.
SKYLARK Alauda arvensis L.
Down. Colour.—Light sandy, dark at the base of the pre-
penne giving the whole a peculiar “ leveret ” appearance.
Character.—Fairly long and abundant.
Distribution. — Inner supra-orbital, occipital, humeral,
spinal, ulnar, and femoral; spinal tract confined to small
area over and just above sacrum.
CoLoRATION OF Movutn. Inside, orange-yellow; two oval
black spots at base of tongue situated bilaterally, another
triangular spot forms the tip of the tongue; externally,
flanges whitish.
KINGFISHER Alcedo ispida L.
Down. Absent. (N.B.—Spirit specimen.)
ON THE MOUTH-COLORATION OF SOME
NESTLING BIRDS.
BY
ANNIE C. JACKSON.
Havine read, with interest, Mr. Pycraft’s article on the
colouring of the inside of the mouths of nestling birds in
British Birps for October, 1907, I determined, if possible,
to make some observations during the following spring; the
more so, as but little material seemed to have been collected
on the subject. I now give the results of my observations,
which seem to prove that the spotted type of mouth in
nestlings is far from common.
Unfortunately, I was not able to examine any of the Tit
family ; for nesting as they do in crevices and holes it is
difficult to reach the young birds. I was struck with the fact
that all the downy chicks of the Order ZLimicole which
I have had the opportunity of examining, had very in-
conspicuously coloured mouths. But before one can draw any
conclusions as to the significance of this, it will be necessary
to havea complete list of the colouring of the inside of the
mouths in nestling birds of the helpless type.
MistLEe-THrusH. — Mouth (inside), yellow, vunspotted.
Flanges (outside), pale yellow. Nest well lighted.
Sone-TuHrRusH. — Mouth (inside), orange-yellow. Flanges
not nearly so large and conspicuous as those of the young
Starlings. Nest well lighted.
WHITETHROAT.— Mouth (inside), yellow, with a dark semi-
circular band stretching from one spur of the tongue to the
other. The band should rather be called ‘dusky,” than
black.
— Wittow-Wren.—Mouth (inside), unspotted yellow. Nest
well lighted.
Wren.—Mouth (inside) and flanges very pale lemon-yellow,
unspotted. Nest badly lighted.
TREE-CREEPER.— Mouth (inside), yellow, unspotted. The
196 BRITISH BIRDS.
nest was situated in the split trunk of a pine tree and was
fairly well lighted.
Grey WacrTaiLt.—WMouth (inside), yellow, unspotted. Nest
placed under a ledge of rock, fairly lighted.
Meavow-Prrir.— Mouth (inside), flesh-coloured, rather paler
on the spurs of the tongue; unspotted.
SpoTttEeD FrycatcHer.—Mouth (inside), yellow, unspotted.
Nest well lighted.
GREENFINCH.—Mouth (inside). The tongue red, spurs
white; palate red, shading into purple. Flanges (inside),
purple; (outside), deep red. Nest moderately lighted.
CHAFFINCH.—Mouth (inside) purplish red. Flanges (out-
side), pale yellow. Nest well lighted.
LesseER ReEppoti. — Mouth (inside). The tongue and
flanges purplish-red, spurs of tongue white, palate white and
horny. Edges of upper mandible, inside, blackish. Flanges
(outside), pink. Nest well lighted.
BuuuFincH. Mouth (inside), red. Flanges (inside), purple ;
(outside), pale yellow. Nest moderately lighted.
YELLOW Buntine.—WMouth (inside), purple-red, unspotted.
Nest well lighted.
STaRLING.—WMouth (inside), yellow, palate bristly. Flanges
(outside), light yellow and very large and conspicuous. Nest
in a thick yew tree and badly lighted.
SKYLARK.—WMouth (inside), yellow, with three black spots
on the tongue forming the angles of a triangle, the base of the
triangle corresponding to the base of the tongue; also a
blackish spot at the tip of the lower and upper mandibles.
Nest well lighted. ,
Woop-Picron.—WMouth (inside), dirty white. Flanges in-
conspicuous dark grey. Nest moderately lighted.
Lapwine.—WMouth (inside), tongue and palate white, palate
having peculiar little roughnesses like tiny teeth running back
towards the throat.
OysTER-CATCHER.—Mouth (inside), fleshy-pink.
Common SANDPIPER.—WMouth (inside), bluish-grey.
Common REpsHANK.— Mouth (inside), pale bluish-grey.
CuRLEW.—Mouth (inside), pale fleshy-pink.
Arctic Trern.— Mouth (inside), fleshy-pink.
NOTES ON THE COMMON CUCKOO IN INDIA.
BY
MAJOR H. A. F. MAGRATH, M.B.0.0.
So much has been written on the subject of the Common
Cuckoo (Cuculus canorus) that one might suppose nothing
more remains to be recorded; yet the following notes,
based on observations of this species in the North-
Western Himalayas, may be of interest to the readers
of British Brrps.
In the North-Western Himalayas this bird arrives
at its breeding grounds about the middle of April, and
from the middle of this month to the middle of June its
familiar call is a common sound on the hill-sides ; but
once the middle of the month is past it gradually
decreases. The latest record I have is July 13th.
During the time that the call is uttered, I have noticed
that the body is by no means invariably held in the
horizontal position with which we are most of us familiar.
On the contrary, it sometimes assumes a semi-upright
attitude. Further, I have noticed that while the call
is being made the body is swayed slightly from side to
side, and this swaying motion is especially marked in the
tail.
In my experience the Cuckoo’s notes do not alter as
the season advances, though the contrary is usually held
to be the case. The bird is probably more vigorous
at the beginning of the season, and the call may then
be more prolonged. The typical tri-syllabic call is, I
believe, entirely connected with the proximity of the
female. The well-known variations of the ordinary call
are as likely to be heard at the beginning as at the end
of the season.
It is strange that no observer seems to have noticed
that the Cuckoo, like many, if not all, song-birds, acquires
198 BRITISH BIRDS.
his full song only by degrees. I have met with it early in
April in the plains, when in the spring passage, and heard
the ludicrous attempts to produce the call result, for the
first two hours at any rate, in nothing more than a croak-
ing sound! The full call is, however, acquired in a day
or two, but is very feeble: probably the full compass is
not attained till the breeding grounds are reached, that
is to say, when the bird has become sexually ripe.
As regards the eggs of the Cuckoo in India I can say
but little from personal observation. But in the summer
of 1907, when in the Thandiani-Hazara district, at an
elevation of 9,000 feet, I found three blue Cuckoos’ eggs
in nests of the Dark Grey Bush-Chat (Orezcola ferrea)
and the Indian Blue-Chat (Larvivora brunnea), and as
Cuculus canorus was the only Cuckoo, to my knowledge,
frequenting the vicinity of these nests, I could only
attribute the eggs to this species. In order to make sure,
however, I shot a female Cuckoo, and with great luck
took from the oviduct fragments of shell (the egg having
been broken) of a beautiful pure blue, which tallied with
the egg found in the nest of Larvivora brunnea. The eggs
of this bird, it may be remarked, were of a delicate,
spotless, blue colour, while those of the Dark Grey Bush-
Chat were spotted with a few tiny specks of darker
greenish-blue. But the eggs of this last species present
some variation, showing different shades of pale bluish-
green, speckled more or less densely with chestnut and
pale rufous.
WOOD-PIGEON “ DIPHTHERIA.”
Nort the least of the aims of BririsH Birps is the advance-
ment of the Study of Economic Ornithology, and the great
interest which was taken in our endeavour to penetrate the
mystery surrounding the so-called ‘“ diphtheria” 1 Wood-
Pigeons shows that our readers are in entire sympathy with
this most important object.
The appeal which we made for material met with a most
hearty response ; and in the able hands of Dr. C. B. Ticehurst
this material was made to yield some most interesting and
valuable results. But, as may be seen from his Report,
published in our issue for August last, many points require
further elucidation; and we feel that, having gone so far it is
our bounden duty to go further, till all possible facts have
been ascertained. We, therefore, turn again to our readers.
for help in providing material which Dr. Ticehurst, once
more, has kindly promised to deal with.
It has been contended that Wood-Pigeon diphtheria is com-
municable to man; but. so far, Dr. Ticehurst’s investigations
do not lend much support to this view. It is certainly
significant that it appears to be by no means so readily spread
among other birds—and notably game-birds—as was supposed.
Having regard to the importance of this aspect of the disease,
and to the statements which have been made thereon by
other workers with regard to the spread of the disease among
domesticated animals and man, further research is emphati-
cally to be desired.
The importance of this enquiry must be perfectly obvious
to everyone ; and we may remark that its significance is fully
appreciated—as might be expected—by medical men. The
‘Lancet,’ September 5th, 1908, in commenting on Dr.
Ticehurst’s paper in our Magazine, expressed a hope that we
might be induced to continue what we had begun. And as.
Dr. Ticehurst is again willing to place his skill at our disposal
we appeal to our readers for help during the coming winter in
filling up the schedules issued with this number. And it may
be remarked that we shall be as grateful for negative, as for
positive evidence. Further copies of the schedule will be sent
to any of our readers who may desire to enlist the sympathy of
others who, as yet, do not happen to be among our subscribers.
THe Epirors.
200 BRITISH BIRDS.
BARRED WARBLERS IN NORFOLK.
On September llth, Mr. H. A. V. Maynard, shooting with
me in the Cley bushes, secured an immature specimen of
the Barred Warbler (Sylvia nisoria). Its appearance in the
bushes was very light, and it showed no inclination to skulk.
The wind was N.W., and it had been raining all the morning,
the bird making its appearance just after the clearing
shower.
K. C. ARNOLD.
On September 12th T. Cringle, one of Lord Leicester’s
keepers, shot a young female Barred Warbler on the Wells
Marshes. Unfortunately it was very badly damaged by the
shot. There were only a few birds in the bushes on that
day, one Common Whitethroat being the only other warble:
recognised, but there was a distinct increase of Meadow-
Pipits on the marsh, and I think there were some Rock-Pipits
also.
F. G. PENROSE.
YELLOW - BROWED WARBLERS, RED - BREASTED
FLYCATCHERS, BLUETHROATS AND OTHER BIRDS
IN NORFOLK.
Tue following notes from the neighbourhood of Blakeney of
the chief movements of migrants observed during September,
1908, may be of interest. From September 7th to 20th the
wind was chiefly westerly, south-westerly and southerly, and
practically no migrating small birds were seen until September
18th, when a large number of Pied Flycatchers and a good
many Common Redstarts appeared, but by September 21st
they had nearly all left. After a wet day with a south-west
wind on the 22nd, the weather cleared and the wind veered
to the north-east on the 23rd. On the morning of this day I
shot an immature Red-breasted Flycatcher (Muscicapa parva).
A few Redstarts and Blackcaps and one Ring-Ouzel were the
only other migrants seen in the morning, but during the
afternoon a large migration setin. Myson (W. R. G. Richards)
shot a female Yellow-browed Warbler (Phylloscopus super-
ciliosus) and Pinchen (a well-known local fowler) shot a male
of the same species. Both birds were very tame. We saw
also numbers of Redstarts and a few Pied Flycatchers, Black-
caps, Garden-Warblers and Ring-Ouzels, while one Bluethroat
(Cyanecula swecica) was also seen and shot. On September
24th Ramm (another well-known local fowler) shot a mature
male Red-breasted Flycatcher in very fine plumage, and
NOTES. 201
several more Bluethroats were seen and shot. On the 25th
the wind went back to the west and the migration con-
siderably decreased, but Ramm shot another immature male
Red-breasted Flycatcher, and several more Bluethroats were
obtained. On the 26th, the wind being south-westerly, the
birds had nearly all gone, while on the 27th we saw only one
Redstart.
Since leaving Norfolk I have had word from Ramm that
he shot another Yellow-browed Warbler (a mature male) on
October 2nd.
F. I. Ricwarps.
YELLOW-BROWED WARBLERS IN YORKSHIRE.
On September 23rd, 1908, I shot in Holderness, Yorkshire,
on the sea coast, a male (apparently adult) of the Yellow-
browed Warbler (Phylloscopus superciliosus). The yellow bars
on the wings attracted my attention, as the bird fluttered up
from some buckthorn bushes, the flight much resembling that
of the Willow-Wren. Athick sea-fog prevailed, following a night
of heavy rain, the wind being slight, and from the south-east.
The bird was identified in the flesh by Mr. H. F. Witherby,
who kindly prepared the skin forme. The gizzard was full
of small flies and other minute insects.
ARTHUR R. GALE.
On September 30th I had the good fortune to obtain a
Yellow-browed Warbler near the same place as the one
recorded above. The weather was (and had been) clear
and hot, with a light southerly breeze. There was very little
movement of birds apparent, and the Yellow-browed Warbler
was quite alone, and was very lively. Its gizzard was full of
small flies, and the bird was fat, so that it may well have been
travelling down the coast in a leisurely fashion. It was a
male and, judging by the texture of the skull, which I have
always found an infallible test, an adult.
H. F. WirHersy.
A SUSSEX RUFOUS WARBLER.
Aédon galactodes or A. familiaris ?
In Borrer’s ‘‘ Birds of Sussex”? (pp. 63-64), there is an
account of the first example of the Rufous Warbler shot in the
British Islands. Mr. A. L. Butler has recently called my
attention to the fact that the figure of this specimen is
undoubtedly drawn from a specimen of Aédon familiaris, the
brown central pair of rectrices, which is one of the chief
characteristics of this form, being well shown in the plate.
202 BRITISH BIRDS
Can any of your readers inform me where the original
‘specimen is? I do not recollect seeing it in the Booth
Museum.
If this example should prove to be referable to Aédon
familiaris—which I strongly suspect—the specimen recorded
by Mr. J. B. Nichols in your January number (Vol. I., p. 257)
is the second recorded example of this form in the British
Islands.
M. J. NreoLn.
[Borrer states that ae bird was moulting, and that the
feathers on the back and tail, ‘especially the “central ones of
the latter, are much worn” (Birds of Sussex, p. 64), which may
account for the eee of these feathers. If correctly
coloured the bird in the plate appears too dark on the back for
A. familiaris.—EDs. |
WHITE WAGTAIL INTERBREEDING WITH PIED
WAGTAIL IN DEVONSHIRE.
On April 8th last I noticed a White Wagtail on my lawn (near -
Sidmouth). It only stayed a short time, though I was able to
get a good view of it. As it did not put in an appearance again
I imagined it to be only a traveller, but early in June I met
with a bird, which may have been the same one, at the other
end of the village. I watched it for some time feeding in a
roadside ditch outside some farm buildings, after which I
lost it. It was back at the same place about an hour later,
this time accompanied by a male Pied Wagtail, with which
pairing took place. It was not till June 13th that I was able
to find the nest, which was situated in the stump of an old
straw rick, and contained six eggs. I took these on the
14th, as the rick was to be thrown down on the following day.
‘They only differ from Pied Wagtails’ eggs with which I have
been able to compare them, in having the surface markings
brown without any shade of grey, and bolder in character.
The bird appeared to me to be less suspicious than the Pied
Wagtail usually is, and did not hesitate to go back to its nest
while under observation.
It may be well to add that I have had opportunities for
watching White Wagtails at close quarters in Scotland, and
that a pair of Pied Wagtails were nesting in the ivy of my
house at the same time as the pair above recorded were nesting
in‘the rick, so that I had good opportunities for comparing
the hen Pied with the hen White Wagtail. The sharply
‘defined black hood of the latter and the pure grey colour of
its back and upper tail-coverts were most distinctive.
Amyas W. CHAMPERNOWNE.
NOTES. 203
LESSER REDPOLL NESTING IN ESSEX.
I po not know whether there are any records of the Lesser
Redpoll’s nesting in Essex, but probably, in any case, instances
are sufficiently uncommon to be worth noticing. A pair
built a nest this year at the very top of a standard pear tree
in my garden at Chelmsford. On July 28th the pair of old
birds were accompanied by two young ones, and this little
family party, a rather noisy one, remained about here for
two or three weeks off and on, but have now apparently quite
disappeared. The nest, on examination, proved to contain
one much decomposed young one, so that apparently the
clutch consisted of three eggs.
LEONARD GRAY.
BREEDING OF THE CROSSBILL IN COUNTY DUBLIN.
ALTHouGH the common Crossbill (Loxia curvirostra) has been
noticed on several occasions in the Scalp, and elsewhere, in
co. Dublin, there is no note of its having bred in the county,
and all records of its appearances have been, I think, in June,
July, or August, when small flocks usually wander over the
country. The following notes of its breeding in co. Dublin
this year may therefore be of interest.
About mid-June, 1907, Mr. C. V. Stoney and myself saw
a flock of fifteen Crossbills in the Scalp. This flock had in-
creased to about twenty birds in August. They never left
the neighbourhood during September, October, November,
December, and in January we commenced to search most
carefully for a nest. By March 7th the flock had been reduced
to three or four pairs, and still there was no sign of a nest.
On March 16th Mr. Stoney heard a Crossbill singing in the fir
woods, and while trying to locate the bird he saw another
Crossbill a few feet from him in a Scotch fir. Watching it, he
saw it run along a dead branch of the tree with head down,
and nip off with its bill a twig, and fly with it into a Scotch
fir close by. The nest, about 35 feet up, could be distinctly
seen with the aid of glasses, and was just commenced, being
a mere platform of twigs, with daylight showing through.
On March 28th I climbed to the nest and watched the sitting
bird from a distance of about 18 in. for a long while. I
touched its back with my fingers before it left the nest, and
then it stayed quite near me all the time I was in the tree.
The nest, which was very compact, was lined with dead
grass—no feathers or fur—and it had the usual platform of
larch and fir twigs. It contained three eggs, quite different
204 BRITISH BIRDS.
to any Crossbill’s eggs I have ever seen, the ground colour
being blue, almost as blue as in the egg of a Bullfinch,
sparingly spotted with dark brown; one egg had a lilac
streak. R. Hamitton HUNTER.
CIRL BUNTING SINGING IN OCTOBER.
Ar noon on October 18th—a dull, muggy morning—I heard
a Cirl Bunting in full song at Heath, near Leighton Buzzard.
During the quarter of an hour that I waited at the spot,
the bird, which was perched on the top of a thorn hedge,
sang persistently at intervals of a few seconds. Is not mid-
October a late date for this species to be in song ? |
CHAS. OLDHAM.
LATE NEST OF THE KINGFISHER.
On October 10th, 1908, I was informed that there was a
Kingfisher’s nest in the banks of the Wenning, near Bentham,
Yorkshire. I went and inspected the nest and found it to
contain four young nearly ready to fly. The late date is
remarkable, and the very warm weather we have been having
may partly account for it. GraHaAmM W. MuRDOcH.
SCOPS-OWL OFF ABERDEENSHIRE.
Ir may be worth while to put on record that I have in my
possession a male Scops-Owl (Scops giu), which was captured
on a trawler about twenty-five miles off the coast ot
Aberdeenshire in October, 1900. This bird was in an
exhausted state, and although the plumage was in fair
condition it was much faded. From this arises another
question: What is the nautical limit within which a bird
may be called “ British ”’ ? HK... R. Faron;
HONEY-BUZZARD IN SHROPSHIRE.
I RECENTLY examined a fine example of the Honey-Buzzard
which had been shot in North Shropshire, about the last day
of September, 1908. It appears to be a male in its second
year, and belongs to the dark-brown form. The last prior
record in the county was in August, 1881, when three are
said to have been seen near Ludlow, one of which was caught.
H. E. Forrest.
GREY PHALAROPE IN SUMMER IN DEVONSHIRE.
On the morning of May 14th last I was surprised to find a
Grey Phalarope (Phalaropus fulicarius) fluttering on a path
in my garden (near Sidmouth). The bird was_ hopelessly
NOTES. 205
crippled, having evidently fallen a victim to the heavy gale
which had raged during the night. It proved to be a female
in summer plumage, the tips of not more than five or six
grey feathers showing among the chestnut of the lower breast.
I find only two previous occurrences recorded from this
county of this species in summer plumage.
Amyas W. CHAMPERNOWNE.
NESTING OF THE COMMON SNIPE IN KENT.
In 1896 my brother and I found a single pair of Snipe nesting
in Kent (cf. Zoologist, 1897, p. 271), but since then I have
no certain record of any having bred. However, on April
21st of this year, | was walking with a friend along one of the
many “levels” which connect up with Romney Marsh, and
he told me that there had been several Snipe there for some
time, and on that day we saw three or four pairs flying round
and uttering their summer note, but we did not hear them
‘“drumming.” I had no time on that day to search for a
nest. On June 16th I was again in the same spot, and saw
at least two pairs flying round and “ drumming,’ and from
their behaviour they evidently had young about, but the
state of the grass made a search for them impossible. My
friend told me that the Snipe were “ drumming ”’ nearly every
day between my two visits, so that I do not think that there
can be any doubt that they had bred there. The “ levels ”
were unusually wet all through the summer, which probably
accounted for Snipe breeding there this year, and I have
noticed before that these birds are particularly influenced
by the state of a prospective breeding ground, a place which
is wet and marshy one year and holding several pairs, will be
perhaps too dry another year and the birds will be absent ;
the obvious inference being that under one condition the
food supply will suffice, and under the other it will not.
Cs 6B, TichHuRst:.
PECTORAL SANDPIPER AND BARTRAM’S
SANDPIPER IN KENT.
A PECTORAL SANDPIPER (J'ringa maculata) frequented a piece
of marshy ground in Kent for several days during July, 1908.
This bird was first noticed by the Duchess of Bedford and
myself on July 14th. It was very shy, but by careful stalking
I obtained a very good view of it through binoculars at about
twenty yards’ distance. Owing to the somewhat worn
appearance of the plumage I take it to have been an adult
bird. Its flight was somewhat peculiar, and reminded one
206 BRITISH BIRDS.
of the “‘ soaring ’”’ breeding flight of a male Redshank. Her
Grace informs me that this bird was still in the same place
on July 21st.
On July 18th a Bartram’s Sandpiper (Bartramia longicau-
data) was shot on Romney Marsh, and I examined it in the
flesh two days later in Mr. Bristow’s shop at St. Leonards.
It was an adult male in good condition, but in somewhat
worn breeding plumage. On July 23rd Mr. Bristow informed
me that on the previous day (the 22nd) he saw a bird on
Pevensey Level which he believes to have been a Bartram’s
Sandpiper.
The interesting note by the Duchess of Bedford on the
Solitary Sandpiper in Kent, in the August number of
British Brrps, coupled with the present records, seem to
point to an immigration of American sandpipers to England.
It would be interesting to know if any of your correspondents
have noticed similar arrivals of American species in Britain.
With the possible exception of the Scilly Islands, Sussex
and Kent can claim to have produced more records of American
waders than any other part of Great Britain. Possibly this
is owing to the fact that there are more observers in these
counties than elsewhere on the south coast. At any rate,
there can be no doubt that the tendency of these waders is
to follow a west to east line of flight.
M. J. NICOLL.
PECTORAL SANDPIPER IN NORFOLK.
At Cley, between September Ist and 17th, 1908, I repeatedly
saw a bird which I judged to be the Pectoral Sandpiper
(Tringa maculata). The first time it got up it uttered the
note which I remembered hearing at Aldeburgh, some years
ago—a double chirp. I watched it once through glasses at
about twenty yards, and thought I made out the pectoral
band. It was often with Dunlins, and I could always pick
it out by its superior size, but for many days it escaped the
notice of the other frequenters of the estuary, mainly, I think,
because it uttered its note very seldom, and the note when
uttered was so low. It was the last wader I saw before I
left the place. E. C. ARNOLD.
THE LEVANTINE SHEARWATER IN BRITISH
WATERS.
I HAVE received some very interesting information from
Mr. W. J. Clarke (the Scarborough wildfowler) with regard
to the occurrence of the Levantine Shearwater (Puffinus
NOTES. 207
yelkouanus) off the Yorkshire coast. In his “‘ Monograph of the
Petrels,’’ now in course of publication (p. 107), Dr. Godman
gives the range of this species as practically confined to the
Mediterranean, although its disposition to wander northwards
occasionally was evidenced by the fact that it had been re-
corded several times from the seas to the south and east of
Great Britain. If we exclude the Yorkshire records, these
occurrences appear to be as follow: Devon, three; Hamp-
shire, one; Kent, one; Northumberland, one. The
Yorkshire records up to the date of Mr. Clarke’s most recent
observations are as follow :—
1. 1877, autumn, near Redcar (T. H. Nelson, B. of Yorks, p. 760).
2. 1880 (about), Flamborough Do. Do.
3. 1890, Aug. 16th. Flamborough Do. Wo:
4. 1898, Oct., Bridlington (R. B. Sharpe, Bull. B.O.C., X., p. 48).
5. 1899, Feb. 4th, 2 adult, Scarborough (T. H. Nelson, B..of Yorks,
ps 76).
6. 1900, Sept. 13th, ? jun., Scarborough Do. Do.
7. 1900, autumn, Scarborough Do. Do.
8. 1902, Sept. Ist, ¢ adult, Scarborough Do. Do.
9. 1904, Sept. 17th, 2, Scarborough (W. J. Clarke, Zool., 1905, p. 74).
10. 1904, Sept. 27th, Scarborough Do. Do.
11. 1907, Sept. 9th, 2, Scarborough (W. J. Clarke, an litt.).
12. 1907, Sept. 19th, ?, Scarborough Do.
13. 1907, Sept. 19th, ¢, Scarborough Do.
14. 1907, Sept. 28th, °, Scarborough Do.
15. 1908, Sept. 4th, 6, Scarborough Do.
16. 1908, Sept. 21st, Scarborough Do.
17. 1908, Sept. 24th, Scarborough Do.
Mr. Clarke writes that out of twenty-two Shearwaters
which he has had through his hands since 1890, twelve have
been specimens of the Levantine species. With one excep-
tion, all these were shot from a boat from four to eight
miles from land, and most of them in the dusk of the
evening. Mr. Clarke, who has himself obtained several of
these birds, considers the Levantine to be the com-
monest Shearwater off the coast of Yorkshire in the autumn,
but in his experience it never approaches near the shore, and
must be sought in the dusk. It looks on the wing, he says,
distinctly larger and darker than the Manx Shearwater.
It would certainly seem by Mr. Clarke’s valuable observations
that the Levantine Shearwater migrates regularly northward
in, autumn, and if this be the case not only is our knowledge
of the distribution of the bird affected, but we have the
anomaly of a species migrating north in autumn. Shearwaters
are difficult birds to observe, and the Levantine has for many
years been confused with the Manx Shearwater, but for those
who like to repeat that there is nothing more to be learnt
about British birds, and that there is nothing to be learnt from
208 BRITISH BIRDS.
the occurrence of “ stragglers,” here is an occasion to think
again. We hope that Mr. Clarke’s observations will induce
some of our readers, who have opportunities for doing so,
to go out in boats in the dusk of the evening and study
Shearwaters.
With reference to the rosy tint of the breast referred to by
Dr. N. F. Ticehurst (antea, p. 138) Mr. Clarke writes as
follows :—‘‘I have examined a good many freshly-killed,
as well as a couple of living, specimens, and none of them
showed the slightest sign of any rosy tint on the breast.”
ape eu te H. F. WITHERBY.
GoLDEN ORIOLE IN LINCOLNSHIRE.—A specimen of Oriolus
galbula, which is a somewhat rare visitor so far north as
Lincolnshire, flew against a telegraph wire “recently ”
(? August, 1908) at Gainsborough (F. M. Burton, Nat., 1908,
p. 399).
SwaLtow’s Nest on A Lamp SHapE.—The nest of a
Swallow on the shade of an electric-lamp is recorded and a
photograph given, with a summary of previously-recorded
curious nesting sites for this bird (Feld, 12, 1x., 1908, p. 514).
LessER REDPOLL NESTING IN SussEx.—Mr. R. Morris
reports that at least one pair of Linota rufescens bred again
(cf. antea, Vol. I., p. 183) this year at Maresfield (Zool., 1908,
p- 350).
CuoucH IN LANCASHIRE.—Mr. E. Bell reports that a
specimen of Pyrrhocorax graculus was shot near Wigan in the
middle of September last. The Chough has previously
occasionally wandered to Lancashire (Field, 26,1x., 1908, p.590).
Hoopor IN Ross-SHIRE.—Colonel W. H. E. Murray records
that an example of Upupa epops was caught at Geanies on
September 9th. The Hoopoe is not often recorded from
Scotland (Field, 19, 1x., 1908, p. 547).
SAND-GROUSE IN Essex.—‘‘R. M.” reports that an
example of Syrrhaptes paradoxus was shot on Great Mollands
Farm, South Ockenden, on September Ist, 1908 (fzeld, 12,
Ix., 1908, p. 514).
RurF In co. CLARE.—A pair of Machetes pugnax, a rare
casual visitor to Ireland, were shot on September 4th in co.
Clare (H. V. Macnamara, Field, 12, 1x., 1908, p. 514).
SABINE’s GuLL IN NorFrotk.—On September Ist, 1908,
a Xema sabinit was shot on Breydon (F. A. Arnold, Zool.,
1908, p. 352). The bird was an adult in full summer plumage
(J. H. Gurney, in litt.).
WOOD-PIGEON ENQUIRY.
STAMP.
tak EDITORS OF
CBR TISE: BIRDS,”
326, HIGH HOLBORN,
LONDON, W.C.
- WOOD-PIGEON ENQUIRY
You are urgently requested to answer as many of the questions detailed below as possible, and to
the Schedule to the Editors of British Birds by March lst, 1909. It is hoped that the readers of the
will thus co-operate and collect a large number of facts. The result of the enquiry will be announced in
number, when all the observations have been collated and compared.
CGAP DEIN NICETCTUIL EACLE CRS! i, eye here ce akicactccranesnecedincvesniSbvasttvtatcic on ocrasls? a EIEU ee eoet eRe
Distret (state County) in which observations. were Madl............0isissisunsomsinsamaunsantelnemutiginnntetiieeiisinchnanss:osckaeqn aa
MIGRATORY MOVEMENTS.
=<
1. Have they been plentiful )
this winter compared to
other years, especially to
last year ?
2. When did the flocks arrive ?
3. When did they depart ?
searce or plentiful, and of
4. Has the food supply been
what has it consisted ? }
1. Have you noticed either TuHRoat DisEAsn.
disease, and at what time of
year ? Ifnodisease has been
met with, please note the fact.
FratHer DISEASE.
2. What percentage of indi-
viduals has been affected ?
3 Has the food supply been
plentiful or scarce, and of
what has it consisted at
the time when the disease
was noticed ?
4. Have you any observa;
tions relating to the course
and length of either disease?
5. Have you any evidence to |
account for the transmis-
sion of the diseases ? J
‘isease in any other species
6. If you have observed either
“arward specimens.
WOOD-PIGEON ENQUIRY.
7HE EDITORS OF
Pia) ISrl BURDS,”
326, HIGH HOLBORN,
LONDON, W.C.
ih #
iim ~“WOi
¢
‘s
_ ANILUSTRATED-MAGA
DEVOTEDTOTHEBIRDS'ON
‘DECEMBER 1,
“Gans
- MONTHLY-ONESHILLING-NET
S26HIGHHOLBORNICNDON
WITHERBY& C2
NAUMANN'S i; BIRDS OF MIDDLE EUROPE.” Z
NAUMANN (J. F.). ‘‘ Naturgeschichte der Woge el Mitteleuropas.”’ Neubear- - C ?
beitet yon Prof. R._Blasius, W. Blasius, R
Carl R. Hennicke. Jubildums-Prachtausgabe.
uri und herausgegeben von | _ ;
430. PLATES BEAUTIFULLY REPRODUCED IN COLOUR from drawings by. the «|
wel one Bird Painter J. G. Keulemans, Bruno” Geisler, E. de Maes
vand others. ©
12. Vols. Folio,, Drésden, 18961904.
Bound in half cloth, £6°10s. net. Bound in half morocco, £8 8s. net.
A copy of this Work'in Sern tcctly. pe: ae at Messrs. Hodgson’ 5
WILLIAMS & NORGATE, 14, Henrietta Street, Covent Garden, London, W.C.
NOW READY.
THE SPORTSMAN’S-
BRITISH BIRD BOOK.
By R. LYDEKKER.
Beautifully Illustrated with 345 Plates absolutely true
| to Nature.
es 8vo. 620 pages. 30s. net.
A Concise Work on British Birds, accurate and. up to date,
free as possible from technicalities, and simple and readable as
1 the circumstances of the case permit. 3
‘LONDON: ROWLAND WARD, LIMITED. —
The si esa 167, Piccadilly.
WATKINS & DONCASTER, |
Raturalists, hs
And Manufacturers of CABINETS and APPARATUS for Entomology, Birds’ Fase mee
~and Skins, and all Branches of Natural History.
A LARGE STOCK OF INSECTS, and BIRDS’ EGGS and SKINS.
Speciality :—Obiects for Nature Study, Drawing Classes, &e.
-BIRDS, MAMMALS, &c., PRESERVED and MOUNTED by FIRST-CLASS. hcg pees 54 if |
RUE TO NATURE.
All Books and Publications on. Natural History fappien
36, STRAND, LONDON, W.C. (Five Doors from Charing Oras.)
sCphelogue (162 pp.) gate free,
Fe ag
DRDSHBIRDS
EPP ED bY oH. F.. WITHERBY,, F-.2Z.S.,, M-B.0.U.
peo lED BY -W.. P.- PYCRAFT, A.LS., M.B.0.U.
ContTENTS OF NUMBER 7, Vou. II. DECEMBER 1, 1908.
On the Nesting of the Scaup-Duck in Scotland, by P. H.
Behr, MA] MB., B.C., F)2.8., M.B:O:0. .:
Some Early British Ornithologists and their Works, by
W. H. Mullens, M.a., LL.M., M.B.o.u. V.—Robert Plot
(1641—1696) :
On the Song of the Wood- Warbler, by H. W: Mapleton,
B.A., M.B.O.U.
On the More Important Additions to our ’ ‘Knowledge of
British Birds since 1899, by H. F. Witherby and N. F.
Ticehurst. Part XV.—(continued from page 150)
Pallas’s Grasshopper-Warbler (ZLocustella certhiola) in Ire-
land, by R. M. Barrington
Notes :—Barred Warbler in Lincolnshire (G. H. Caton Haigh).
Goldcrests from East Coast Lighthouses (William
Evans). Yellow-Browed Warbler in Lincolnshire (G. H.
Caton Haigh). The East European Chiffchaff in the
Isle of Wight (J. L. Bonhote). The Northern Race of
the Willow-Wren in Great Britain (C. B. Ticehurst).
Nesting Habits of the Marsh-Warbler (Norman Gilroy).
Aquatic Warbler in Sussex (E. C. Arnold). Blue-
Headed Wagtail in Norfolk (F.I. Richards). Autumn
and Winter Singing of Buntings (H. G. Alexander,
Col. H. Meyrick, C. I. Evans). Little Bunting in Ireland
and Norfolk (R. M. Barrington and H. F. Witherby).
» The Great Spotted Woodpecker as a Breeding Bird in
Scotland (H. F. Witherby). Courting Performance of
the Cuckoo (T. Thornton Mackeith). Little Owl in
Warwickshire (A. G. Leigh). A Remarkable Variety
of the Red-Legged Partridge in Essex (W. P.
Pycraft). Grey Phalarope in Co. Wexford (R. C.
Banks). Buff-breasted Sandpiper in Lincolnshire
(G. H. Caton Haigh). Sabine’s Gull in Lincolnshire
(G. H. Caton Haigh). Late Nests of the Great Crested
and Little Grebes (W. Mackay Wood). Sooty Shear-
waters in Sussex, Kent, and Yorkshire (W. Ruskin
Butterfield and H. F. Witherby). Short Notes
Reviews :—Report on the Immigrations of Summer Resi-
dents in the Spring of 1907. A List of Irish Birds
Page 209
218
226
232
247
ON THE NESTING OF THE SCAUP-DUCK IN
SCOTLAND.
bare. tL. BAR, M-A..M.B., B.C., F:2.58., M.B.0.U.
Prruaprs there is no more interesting fact in the history
of the modern ornithology of these islands than the
210 BRITISH BIRDS.
remarkable spread of the breeding area of many of the
duck-tribe during recent years.
The causes which made its allies, the Tufted Duck*
and Shoveler,t common resident species in Scotland,
have also affected the Scaup-Duck. There are several
early records of its supposed breeding in Scotland.
Under the head of ‘‘ Scaup Pochard ” Selby writes {: “a
single female was shot by Sir William Jardine in a small
loch between Loch Hope and Eriboll in 1834; she was
attended by a young one, which unfortunately escaped
among the reeds. This is the first instance of its breeding
in Great Britain that I am aware of.” In June, 1868,§
Mr. J. A. Harvie-Brown shot an adult male Scaup in
Sutherlandshire, ‘“‘ which had been frequenting the loch for
some days; and from its unwillingness to leave the
locality, though repeatedly disturbed and fired at, I am
fully persuaded that the female was sitting on her eggs
at no great distance. With my friend, Mr. W. Jesse,
I also in June, 1867, obtained a laying of duck’s eggs,
and though failing to identify them, they closely resembled
eggs of this species from Lapland.”’
In 1880 the late Dr. A. C. Stark recorded a nest and
eggs found on Loch Leven which he considered to be those
of a Scaup.|| Full details have recently (antea, p. 132)
been given by Mr. W. Evans, which show that these were
no doubt the eggs of a Tufted Duck.
The records cited above were not accepted by Professor
Newton{] as authentic.
The first authentic nest appears to have been discovered
by Mr. Heatley Noble, and was recorded in the “ Ibis ” for
* J. A. Harvie-Brown, ‘‘ Ann. §.N.H.,” 1896, pp, 3-22; “ Proc. Roy,
Phys. Soc. Edin.,’’ Vol. XIII., pp. 144-160,
+ id., “‘Fauna N.W. Highlands,” p. 232; “Ann. S.N.H.,”* 1902,
p. 282.
t ‘‘ Edin, New Philosph. Journa],’’ XX., p. 293, 1836; wide also
Yarrell, 4th ed., Vol, IV.. p, 425.
§ “Proc. N.H. Soc., Glasgow,” 1875, II., pp. 120 et 121.
|| A. C. Stark, ‘Proc. Roy. Phys. Soc. Ed,,’’ 1881-83, VII., p. 203.
q ‘Dict. Birds,” p, 815.
P. H. BAHR: THE SCAUP-DUCK IN SCOTLAND. 211
1899,* and the “ Annals of Scottish Natural History.’’+
The nest was found in Speyside, and was placed in rushes
on an island five feet from the water’s edge ; it contained
three eggs when found. It was revisited in a week’s
time, but the duck was not sitting. Mr. Noble got within
ten feet of her and watched her for some time close to the
nest. Two days after he watched her leave the nest,
which contained nine eggs, and was deep, cup-shaped, and
better made than most ducks’ nests. In a recent
number of British Birpsft he has described the down
and feathers taken from this nest.
The Scaup-Duck has also been recorded§ as nesting
in the islands south of the Sound of Harris. Mr. Harvie-
Brown’s correspondent writes: “‘ They are numerous,
and have bred for the last four years. Two pairs to my
knowledge in 1897, 1898, and 1899, and three pairs in
last season, 1900.” It was believed to have bred again
in 1901, and in June, 1902, a young bird still in down,
ten days old, was sent to Mr. Harvie-Brown by Guthrie,
a keeper in these islands.
Finally, the nest figured overleaf (Fig. 1) was discovered
on a journey made to these islands with Mr. N. B.
Kinnear for this express purpose.|| Professor Newton,
with his critical acumen, would not at first accept the
record because of the similarity of the eggs to those of the
Tufted Duck, but did so after a careful comparison of
the down and feathers with those taken from the nest
found in 1899 by Mr. Heatley Noble.{
Mr. Kinnear and I spent a fortnight in June, 1906,
searching innumerable lochs for signs of nesting Scaup-
* H. Saunders, “‘Ibis,’’ 1899, p. 648; ‘Bull, B.O.C.,” VIIL., p. 5.
+ J. A. Harvie-Brown, ‘“ Ann. §.N.H.,”’ 1899, p. 215.
{t Britisu Brrps (Mag.), Vol. IT., p. 38.
§ J. A, Harvie-Brown, ‘‘Ann, S.N.H.,” 1902, p. 211; vide also
Guthrie, ‘“‘ Ann. 8.N.H.,”’ 1903, p. 76.
| Kinnear, “Ann. S.N.H.,” 1907, p. 82.
q *¢ Qotheca Wolleyana,”’ Vol. II., pp. 591 and 2.
212 BRITISH BIRDS.
Ducks. For this purpose we had the owner’s kind
permission, and the assistance of his keepers.
On June 4th we discovered a solitary old male Scaup
Fie. 1.—Nest of Scaup-Duck. June 11, 1906. (Photographed by
P. H.. Bahr.)
riding asleep on a peculiarly desolate and unpromising-
looking loch. He was accompanied by a solitary Tufted
drake, and when seen from a distance, even with the aid
of glasses, they seemed, when asleep with head tucked
Ba Met
| Mil head tu t
| i i
| | ! | IAN
Pea aN
1h Sf
(Drawn by P. H. Bahr.)
|
Fie. 2.._Duck and Drake Scaup and Nesting Site.
214 BRITISH BIRDS.
under wing, to be indistinguishable. In certain lights
the grey feathers on the back of the male Scaup do not
show up well, so that these birds can easily be missed
when in company with Tufted Ducks. We waded to
all the islands, but to no purpose. On the next day,
June 5th, we were rewarded by the sight of two pairs,
the drakes in each instance floating lazily about, fast
asleep, with one leg cocked up in the air, as I have
depicted in Fig. 2. No more evidence was forthcoming
till the 9th, when I explored a loch famous for its trout
and the variety of its bird-life. I was lying for no less
than four hours at a stretch on a small islet some twenty
feet in diameter, when I became aware that I was being
watched by a pair of Scaups, every bit as carefully as I
myself was watching some Black-headed Gulls. The duck
appeared to be very anxious, and was swimming about,
evidently on the quz vive, in the neighbourhood of another
rocky islet, while her mate varied his vigil with an
occasional “forty winks,” the temptation for which he
seemed unable to resist. A search was made, and to my
surprise I found that for four hours I had unconsciously
been lying within six feet of a duck’s nest, to all appear-
ance the very one I was in quest of. It was placed under
a boulder, was lined with dark brown down, and contained
nine olive-green eggs, which were not covered up. Owing
to the trampled-down condition of the surrounding
vegetation I had grave doubts as to whether the bird
would return. Consequently I retired to another island
some quarter-mile away and kept watch. Soon I saw
the Scaup duck swim behind the island and disappear,
so I resolved not to disturb her, but to return on the
following Monday, the 11th, with Kinnear.
When the day arrived we rowed up to the island with
very anxious hearts. A brown duck flew off, scuttled
along the water, and settled in a distant part of the loch,
where she was soon joined by an undoubted Tufted
drake!!! So a further search was made; on the next
island, only some three hundred yards away, a Shoveler’s
P.H. BAHR: 'THE SCAUP-DUCK IN SCOTLAND. 215
nest with eleven eggs was found. While I busied myself
taking some photographs, Kinnear explored the remaining
island of the series. This was also very small, had a rocky
base, with large tufts of long grass on top. A brown
duck was flushed off a nest, and settled on the water but
twenty vards from the shore, and was watched for a
quarter of an hour at a stretch through glasses. At
the same time a drake Scaup was seen riding out on the
loch at some distance from the island, and he, afterwards,
Fie. 3.—The Duck Scaup coming off the Nest. (Drawn by P. H. Bahr.)
in company with a drake Tufted, flew past me in my
hiding-place. Kinnear refrained from investigating any
further, but noted that the nest was situated in a deep
hollow some nine inches below the level of the ground, and
well guarded by large tufts of grass (Fig. 1) ; a trampled
pathway led up from the edge of the water to the nest.
An hour after he returned with me. On our approach
the duck was seen leaving the nest, threading her way,
with neck stretched in front of her, through the matted
grass. She scuttled into the water (Fig. 3) and remained
within thirty yards of the bank. The white patch and
216 BRITISH BIRDS.
broad bill were plainly visible, and set aside all doubts
of identification, so that we did not deem it necessary
to take any further steps. She showed her uneasiness
by giving vent to a sort of guttural grunt, splashed the
water with her wings, and finally dived out of sight.
The nest was almost invisible, so cleverly were the grasses
pulled over the top. The eggs were covered with down,
Fie, 4.—Nest of Tufted Duck in the same hollow as the Scaup’s nest in
Fig. 1. May 28, 1907. (Photographed by P. H. Bahr.)
so she had evidently heard us approaching. A quantity
of blackish down, amongst which were greyish-white
feathers, mixed with much fine grass, lined the nest.
The eggs were nine in number, of an olive-green hue,
and of the same size as those in the Tufted Duck’s nest
we had just discovered. In the bottom of the nest we
found a quantity of old eggshells, and it seems that this
hollow had done service on several other occasions. The
P.H. BAHR: THE SCAUP-DUCK IN SCOTLAND. 217
eggs were hard set, and the young were within three
days of hatching.
That same evening we saw five more Scaup-Ducks,
two drakes and three ducks, on a sea-loch. Towards
the end of the same month another nest was found by
the keeper on the same loch. In 1907 I returned, and
though I searched every likely situation, no trace of a
Scaup was seen. The same hollow contained the nest of
a Tufted Duck* (Fig. 4), from which the old bird was
disturbed on three occasions and identified ; it contained
nine eggs, and was to all intents and purposes exactly
similar to the Scaup’s of the year before. There was also
a Shoveler’s nest in exactly the same position. It is
significant that the nests of these three species should
be found on contiguous islands, where, not so many years
ago, they were unknown.
Though essentially a circumpolar species, the Scaup-
Duck has been recorded as nesting in north Germany,
once by Baldamus in Anhalt, and twice by Blasius in
ponds near Brunswick.t
* Cf. “Ann. Scot. Nat. Hist.,’’ 1907, p. 213.
+ Rudolf Blasius, ‘‘ Naumann, Naturgesch. V. Mitteleurop.,’’ new ed.,
1896-1904, Vol. X., p. 153; Howard Saunders, ‘‘Man. B.B..’’ 1899,
p. 449.
( 218 )
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS
AND THEIR WORKS.
BY
W:: H- MULBLENS; --4:,. tea. oe
V.—ROBERT PLOT (1641—1696)
AND SOME EarRLy County NATURAL HISTORIES.
In the year 1661, Joshua Childrey (1623—1670), antiquary,
schoolmaster, and divine, published in London a_ small
duodecimo work entitled “ Britannia Baconia: / or, the
Natural / Rarities / of / England, Scotland, & Wales.” This
book, although of no particular value in itself, being merely
a brief and somewhat imperfect compilation, was nevertheless
destined to be of some considerable influence on the literature
of natural history in this country. For, according to Wood’s
‘““ Athenee Oxonienses’”’ (p. 339), it inspired Robert Plot
(1641—1696), the first keeper of the Ashmolean Museum at
Oxford, with the idea of writing the “ Natural History of
Oxfordshire,” which appeared in 1677, and which was followed
in 1686 by a “ Natural History of Staffordshire,” the work of
the same author; who is said to have also contemplated
similar histories of Middlesex and Kent. These two works of
Robert Plot’s also proved in their turn to be the forerunners
of a numerous series of county natural histories by different
writers.
The full title of the “ Natural History of Oxfordshire ”
is as follows :—
“The / Natural History / of / Oxford-shire, / being an Essay
toward the Natural History / of / England. / By R.P., LL.D. /
[quotation from Arat. in Phzenom.] / [engraving] Printed at
the Theater in Oxford, and are to be had there: / And in
London at Mr. S. Millers, at the Star near the / West-end of
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 219
St. Pauls Church-yard. 1677. / The price in sheets at the
Press, nine shillings. / To Subscribers, eight shillings.
1 Vol. folio.
Collation: pp. 4, Imprimatur & Title. + pp. 8. un. +
pp. 358. + pp. 12, Errata & Index. Map & XVI. Plates.
A second edition of ‘‘ The Natural History of Oxfordshire ”’
appeared in 1705 “with large additions and corrections :
also a short account of the Author, &c.”’
It cannot be said that Plot’s observations on the birds of
Oxfordshire contain anything of much interest or value ;
he was a somewhat credulous writer, and seems to have been
a better authority on plants than on birds, and, indeed, is
mentioned by the eminent John Ray, in the latter’s
“Synopsis Methodica Stirpium Britannicarum” as
‘*Robertus Plot LL. Doctor, e cujus Historiis Naturalibus
lectu sane dignissimis territorii tum Oxoniensis, tum Stafford-
iensis, non pauca in Historiam & Synopsin hance nostram
transtuli.”” It must not, however, be forgotten that Plot’s
book was written at a time when but little was known of
British birds, in fact, the ‘“ Natural History of Oxfordshire ”’
was published a year before the appearance of Willughby’s
famous “ Ornithology’ (English translation).*
Robert Plot dealt with the birds of Oxfordshire on
pp. 175—180 of his book, under the head “‘ of Brutes.” It wil!
here suffice to state that, having informed his readers that
there was but little that he could mention in the way of new
matter “‘ since the feathered kingdom has been so lately and
so carefully surveyed by the learned and industrious Francis
Willughby,” he proceeds to describe, amongst other birds,
one “about the bigness of a sparrow, with a blue back, and
a reddish breast, a wide mouth and a long bill... . from
the noise that it makes commonly called the Wood-cracker,”
although this bird, which was undoubtedly the Nuthatch,
* The Latin edition of Willughby’s work entitled ‘‘ Ornithologizw Libri
tres ’’ appeared in 1676.
+ Cf. Swainson, p. 35.
220 BRITISH BIRDS.
had been duly noticed in Willughby’s Latin edition of the
** Ornithology ” (pp. 19 and 95).
Plot’s other work, “The Natural History of Staffordshire,”
was published in 1686, and is altogether a more important
and far rarer book than the one above mentioned. Its full
title is as follows :—
The / Natural History / of Stafford-shire / by / Robert Plot,
LL.D. / Keeper of the / Ashmolean Museum / and / Professor _
of Chymistry / in the / University / of / Oxford. / Ye shall
describe the Land, and bring the Description hither to me.
Joshua 8. v. 6. / [Engraving] Oxford / Printed at the
Theater, Anno M. DC. LXX XVI.
1 Vol. folio.
Collation: pp. 16 un. + pp. 450 + pp. 14, Index,
** Proposalls of the Author,” and list of Subscribers. Map,
XXXVII. Plates, and extra Plate of “Armes omitted.”
(This last plate is very seldom found in the original state.)
Birds are treated of in Chapter VII., pp. 228—236, and
though the observations are somewhat fuller than in the same
author’s “‘ Natural History of Oxfordshire,’ their principal
interest lies in the curious account of the nesting of the Pewit
(i.e., the Black-headed Gull, Larus ridibundus). A small
portion of this account is given in the fourth edition of
Yarrell’s “‘ British Birds” (Vol. III., p. 599).* But as it is
of considerable interest we here give it in full, together with a
facsimile of the original plate, showing the taking of the young
Pewits.T
‘“‘ But the strangest whole-footed water fowle that frequents
this county is the Larus Cinereus Ornithologi, the Larus
Cinerus tertius Aldrovandi, and the Cepphus of Gesner and
Turner ; in some Counties called the black-Cap, in others the
Sea or Mire-Crow, here the Pewit; which being of the
migratory kind, come annually to certain pooles in the Estate
of the right Worshipfull Sr. Charles Skrymsher Knight to
* The quotation in ‘“‘ Yarrell’’ is by no means word perfect; it did
not appear in the first three editions of that work.
{+ Plot uses the spelling, Pewit or Pewet, indifferently.
-e SOU Ud 5 eR ar fae ae) ol
Aas ek ee ee oF OTe e
00% a ee ee Cs
BEd cab Pap ity 4) Nhe
r i, a Me o.* ' “s _
a ot i We iava ty
a
‘ yews,
gi hii z :
. ’ :
Oe yee ts ae
4 i
es PAi
i @ ;
h Cy ts nd
one al 4
Pen, “oe icf #
4
i i~i~i_i hnh»™]™]>"’»=™>»Ba=™— amEpEpEhmhhx™L__ iii ™ {j pABpE=S S|"
the Pewets annuall
Teftimony of hes
My © es tha:
MANA
paeeee >
‘ GS a it ~ 3
Ty a ae
———= ee
SS
— =
S ASS
"Fi 7,
) boy yi
— weal
“Vj YY iid, ie
LE LN
“li fy als f
rsh iy
ig
[BRITISH BIRDS, Vol. I1., Pl. 5.)
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 221
build and breed, and to no other estate in or neer the County,
but of this Family, to which they have belong’d ultra hominum
memoriam, and never moved from it, though they have
changed their station often. They anciently came to the old
Pewit poole above mentioned, [chap. 6. §§. 36, 40, 42] about
4a mile 8.W. of Norbury Church, but it being their strange
quality (as the whole Family will tell you, to whom I refer
the Reader for the following relation) to be disturb’d and
remove upon the death of the head of it, as they did with-in
memory, upon the death of James Skrymsher, Esq., to Offley-
Moss near Woods-Eves, which Moss though containing two
gentlemans land, yet (which is very remarkable) the Pewits
did discern betwixt the one and the other, and build only on
the land of the next heir John Skrymsher, Esq., so wholy
are they addicted to this family. At which Moss they
continued about three years, and then removed to the old
pewit poole again, where they continued to the death of the
said John Skrymsher, Esq.; which happening on the Eve to
our Lady-day, the very time when they are laying their Eggs,
yet so concerned were they at this gentleman’s death, that
notwithstanding this tye of the Law of Nature, which has
ever been held to be universal and perpetual, they !eft their nest
and Eggs; and though.they made some attempts of laying
again at Offley-Moss, yet they were still so disturbed that they
bred not at all that year. The next year after they went to
Aqualat, to another Gentleman’s Estate of the same family
(where though tempted to stay with all the care imaginable)
yet continued there but two years, and then returned again
to another poole of the next heir of John Skrymsher deceased,
called Shebben poole in the parish of high Offley where they
continue to this day, and seem to be the propriety as I may say
(though a wild-fowle) of the right worshipfull Sr. Charles
Skrymsher Knight, their present Lord and master. But being
of the migratory kind their first appearance is not till about
the latter end of February and then in number scare above
six, which come as it were as harbingers to the rest, to see
whether the Hasts or Islands in the pooles (upon which they
build their neasts) be prepared for them; but these never so
much as lighten, but fly over the poole scarce staying an hour :
about the sixth of March following, there comes a pretty
considerable flight, of a hundred or more, and then they alight
on the hasts, and stay all day, but are gon again at night.
About our Lady-Day, or sooner in a forward Spring, they come
to stay for good, otherwise not till the beginning of April,
when they build their nests, which they make not of sticks,
but heath and rushes, making them but shallow, and laying
222 BRITISH BIRDS.
generally but 4 eggs, 3 and 5 more rarely, which are about the
bignes of a small Hen-egg. The Hasts or Islands are prepared
for them between Michaelmass and Christmass, by cutting down
the reeds and rushes and putting them aside in the nooks and
corners of the hasts, and in the valleys to make them level ;
for should they be permitted to rot on the Islands, the Pewits
would not endure them.
‘“‘ After three weeks sitting the young ones are hatch’t,
and about a month after are almost ready to flye, which
usually happens on the third of June, when the Proprietor
of the poole orders them to be driven and catch’d, the Gentry
comeing in from all parts to see the sport ; the manner thus.
They pitch a Rabbit-net on the bank-side, in the most con-
venient place over against the hasts, the Net in the middle
being about ten yards from the side but close at the ends in
the manner of a bow; then six or seven men wade into the
poole beyond the Pewits, over against the Net, with long
staves and drive them from the hasts, whence they all swim
to the bank side, and landing run like Lapwings into the Net,
where people standing ready, take them up, and put them into
two penns made within the bow of the Net, which are built
round, about 3 yards Diameter, and a yard high or somewhat
better, with small stakes driven into the ground in a circle,
and interwoven with broom and other raddles, as in Tab. 19,
at the bottom whereof is represented in Sculpture, the poole,
and whole method of taking these Pewits ; and Norbury Manor
at the top, the seat of the Proprietor, a most generous
Encourager of this work. In which manner they have taken
off them in one morning 50 dozens at a driving, which at 5s.
per dozen (the ancient price of them) comes to twelve pounds
ten shillings: but at several drifts that have been anciently
made in the same morning, there have been as many taken as
have been sold for thirty pounds, so that some years the profit
of them has amounted to fifty or three score pounds, besides
what the generous Proprietor usually presents his Relations,
and the Nobility and Gentry of the County withall, which he
constantly does in a plentifull manner, sending them to their
houses in Crates alive, so that feeding them with livers, and
other entrals of beasts, they may kill them at what distance
of time they please, according as occasions present themselves,
they being accounted a good dish at the most plentiful tables.
But they commonly appoint 3 days of driving them, within
fourteen days or thereabout, of the second or third of June ;
which while they are doing, some have observed a certain old
one that seems to be somewhat more concerned than the
rest, being clamorous, and striking down upon the very heads of
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISYS. 2238
the Men ; which has given ground of suspicion that they have
some Government amongst them, and that this is their Prince,
that is so much concern’d for its Subjects. And ’tis further
observed that when there is great plenty of them, the Lent-
Corn of the Country is so much the better, and so the Corn-
pastures too, by reason they pick up all the worms, and the
Fern-flyes, which though bred in the Fern, yet nip and feed
on’ the young corn and grass, and hinder their growth.”’
Robert Plot, as we are informed in “a short account of the
Author” appended to the Second Edition of the ‘‘ Natural
9
History of Oxfordshire,’ was the son of Captain Robert Plot,
of Borden in Kent, and was born in 1641 at Sutton-Barn
in the said parish. He was educated at Magdalene Hall in
the University of Oxford, and afterwards at University College
there. In the year 1683 he was appointed first Keeper of
the Ashmolean Museum, and about the same time was made
Professor of Chemistry to the University. In 1694 he was
nominated Mowbray Herald, by Henry, Duke of Norfolk,
and died at his house, Sutton-Barn, April 30th, 1696. A
monument to his memory stands in the Parish Church at
Borden.
In the year 1700* Charles Leigh (1662—1701), ‘‘ Doctor of
Physick,” published in imitation of Plot’s works a worthless
‘Natural History of Lancashire, Cheshire, and the Peak in
Derbyshire,” the full title of the book being as follows :—
The / Natural History of / Lancashire, Cheshire, / and the /
Peak, / in Derbyshire: / with an / Account / of the / British,
Pheenician, Armenian, Gr. and Rom. Antiquities / in those /
Parts. / By Charles Leigh, / Doctor of Physick. / Oxford : /
Printed for the Author, and to be had at Mr. George West’s,/
and Mr. Henry Clement’s, Booksellers there: Mr. Edward
Evet’s / at the Green-Dragon, in St. Paul’s Church-yard ;
and Mr. John / Nicholson, at the King’s Arms in Little-Britain,
London. MDCC.
1 Vol. folio.
* In 1684 appeared the “Scotia illustrata sive Prodomus Historie
Naturalis,” Edinburgh, 1 vol. folio, of Robert Sibald (1641—1722)
which contained some short notes on the birds of Scotland.
224. BRITISH BIRDS.
Collation: pp. 20 un. + pp. 4. + pp. 2 un. + pp. 196.
(Book IT.) pp. 99. (Book III.) pp. 112 + pp. 33 Index. Portrait,
Map & XXIV. Plates. (Numerous mistakes in pagination.)
Birds are treated of, pp. 157—164, Book I., but Leigh’s
ornithological observations are useless and _ trivial, though
he could not well complain of any lack of material, since he
informs us on p. 157 that “These Counties afford us great
variety of Birds, and in some places, even, clog the Inhabitants
with their Plenty.”
County Natural Histories now began to appear at frequent
intervals, and contained more or less useful notices of the local
birds, but it is here only possible to mention some of the rarer
or more important of them in their chronological order :—
1709. Robinson (Thomas)—
An / Essay / towards a / Natural History / of / Westmoreland
/ and / Cumberland. /... . By Tho. Robinson, Rector of ;
Ousby in Cumberland. / London . . . . 1709.
1 Vol. 8vo. (Contains some worthless remarks on birds,
pp. 64—68, and pp. 94—98 of the “ Moral Conclusions,” which
form the latter part of the work.)
1712. Morton (John)—
The / Natural History / of / Northamptonshire: /... . by
John Morton, M.A., / Rector of Oxenden in the same County
25014: A), MAG OnL en Oe
1 Vol. folio. (Birds, pp. 423—438.)
1758. Borlase (William)—
The / Natural History / of / Cornwall. /.... By Wiliam
Borlase, A.M.F.R.S. / Rector of Ludgvan, and Author of the
Antiquities of Cornwall. / Oxford .... MDCCLVIII.
1 Vol. folio. (Birds, pp. 242—248, the information being
chiefly derived from Carew’s Survey of Cornwall, 1602.)
1769. Wallis (John)—
The / Natural History / and / Antiquities / of Northumber-
land: / and so much of the County of / Durham / as lies
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISIS. 225
between the Rivers Tyne and Tweed : joa. by ‘John
Wallis, A.M. / London MDCCLXIX.
2 Vols. 4to. (Birds, pp. 309—346, a considerable account.)
1772. Rutty (John)—
An / Essay / towards a / Natural History / of the / County
of Dublin, /. . .. By John Rutty, M.D. /... . 1772.
2 Vols. 8vo. (Birds, Vol. I., pp. 295—343, and IV. plates
of birds.)
1789. Pilkington (James)—
A / view / of / the / Present State / of / Derbyshire; /... .
by James Pilkington. /.... London. / MDCCLXXXIX.
2 Vols. 8vo. (Birds, Vol. I., pp. 480—496.)
We will conclude our short list with the earliest of the local
ornithologies, 7.e. :—
1809. Tucker (Andrew)—
Ornithologia Danmoniensis ; / or, / an history of the habits
and Economy / of / Devonshire Birds. / Embellished with
coloured plates, engraven from accurate and / Beautiful
Drawings from Nature: /.... By Andrew G. C. Tucker. /
.... London: / Printed for the Author, and published
by T. Cadell and / W. Davies, Strand. / 1809.
1 Vol. 4to.
“An ambitious work of which not even the whole of the
somewhat turgid Introduction was published, but the two
parts printed show the author to have been a physiologist,
anatomist and outdoor-observer far beyond most men of his
time” (cf. Newton’s Dictionary of Birds; introduction,
p. 45).
( 226 )
ON THE SONG OF THE WOOD-WARBLER.
BY
H. W. MAPLETON, B.A., M.B.O.U.
In May last, while availing myself of a very good oppor-
tunity of observing a Wood-Warbler in full song my
attention was called to the fact that this bird has two
distinct songs. As I do not remember to have seen this
fact recorded in works on British birds, I thought it
possible that a few notes on the subject might prove
of interest. Of course, everyone knows that in the songs
of accomplished vocalists, such as the Nightingale’ and
the Song-Thrush, many distinct phrases are utilized in a
variety of combinations, but in the case of the Wood-
Warbler there are two distinct songs, which bear no
resemblance to each other, either in tone or phrasing,
and which, when the bird is singing well, are very
rarely mixed. The first of these is the ordinary song,
which needs no description here.
The second song, which is much rarer than the first,
varies considerably in different individuals as regards
the number of syllables, though the tone is constant.
In the case of the first bird I had under observation, on
May 16th, it consisted of from 9-12 syllables—the
average number in this case being 10. It is sweet, and
rather plaintive in tone, falling gradually from F sharp
to E flat, or possibly D. [This interval I am not certain
about, as I verified it on the pianoforte from memory
only.] In character it resembles to a certain extent
the ecstatic ‘‘ tail-end ”’ of the full song of the Tree-Pipit.
The last and lowest note of this song seems to be the
same as that used as a call-note when the young are
fledged and flying about in family parties.
On May 17th I came across another Wood-Warbler,
and. timed the bird, roughly, for ten minutes, during which
it sang No. 1—the ordinary song—over fifty times, and
No. 2 only about five times. Neither on this, nor on the
previous occasion, did I hear these two songs mixed,
though once or twice the bird would utter three notes of
H. W. MAPLETON: SONG OF WOOD-WARBLER. 227
the prelude of its ordinary song, and then stop, and start
afresh on the second.
On May 3lst I listened to another bird. This individual
differed from the two preceding ones to a certain extent,
as it mixed up the two songs occasionally. It was not
in very full voice. During the time I stood listening it
never sang song No. 2 properly. Several times it sang four
syllables of this song, ending up with three notes of the
prelude of No. 1, and once, without a break, it began
with these four syllables, and ended up with No. 1 in full.
But I failed to hear it sing more than four syllables of
No. 2 at any time.
On June 7th I found a bird singing regularly, but not
very fully. This one very seldom made use of song No. 2.
Once it started on it and ran into the regular song (No. 1)
without a break. I never heard it sing more than four
syllables of song No. 2.
On June 19th I found a fifth bird in full song, and
watched it carefully for 45 minutes, during which time
it never moved far away, and never ceased singing. My
notes on this occasion corroborated those I took in the
first two cases. This bird differed slightly in one respect,
as two or three times it sung the prelude to song No. 1
without the trill. In this individual the number of
syllables in song No. 2 varied from 7—11—the average
number being 8—and it mixed the two songs three times
during the period that I had it under observation.
It would seem that when the Wood-Warbler is singing
well, the number of syllables in its second song varies
from 7-12. As regards the musical interval of this song,
F sharp to E flat would represent a minor third; and I
think that this interval in the song is approximately
correct, though I cannot boast a musician’s trained ear.
When we consider that the double call of the Cuckoo
_ constitutes an interval of a minor third, and that the
_ ten-syllabled song of the Wood-Warbler (which is gradually
falling in tone all through) represents an interval little,
i if at all, larger, it is easy to see that our diatonic scale
1s not well suited for gauging the musical intervals of the
songs of birds.
(228 4
ON THE MORE IMPORTANT ADDITIONS TO OUR
KNOWLEDGE OF BRITISH BIRDS SINCE 1899.
BY
H. F. WITHERBY anp N. F. TICEHURST.
Part XV.
(Continued from page 150.)
LAPWING Vanellus vulgaris Bechst. 8S. page 555.
The wings of the two sexes have been shown by Mr. F. W.
Frohawk to be different. Those of the male are rounder
and broader than those of the female, a characteristic which
may be distinguished in flight. The formule of the primaries
are as follows :—
& ste" 7th: 2 Ist = 4th.
2nd and 4th, equal. 2nd and 3rd, equal and longest.
3rd, longest.
7th, 8th, and 9th, 14 in. longer than in 9.
“In the male the primaries are long and broad, giving a
decidedly curved outline, while the secondaries, being con-
siderably shorter, add greatly to the rounded appearance of
the wing.” Mr. Frohawk also points out that the bill of the
female is longer and her crest shorter than in the male (F. W.
Frohawk, Ibis, 1904, pp. 446-451, figs. 5-10).
AVOCET Recurvirostra avocetta L. 8S. page 561.
CoRNWALL.—One was shot in the Cober Valley, Helston,
on April 21st, 1900—* the only specimen recorded from Corn-
wall during the past twenty-seven years” (J. Clark, Zool.,
1907, p. 286).
NorFoLK AND KEntT.—They still visit these counties with
fair regularity every year in May or June.
Essex.—An immature female was shot at Leigh-on-the-
Sea in November, 1908, and another was shot near the same
place in August, 1901 (F. Cooper, Field, 1908, p. 888.)
NortH WaA.LES.—One seen and identified by Capt. Bailey —
on a marsh near Llanelltyd in 1901 (H. E. Forrest, Vert.
F. N. Wales, p. 338).
BLACK-WINGED STILT AHimantopus candidus Bonn.
S. page 563.
CHESHIRE.—An adult male was obtained on the Mersey
at Latchford, but the date is unknown (Coward and Oldham,
B. of Cheshire, p. 207).
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 299
YORKSHIRE.—A third specimen for the county was shot
at Kilnsea in Holderness “‘many years ago” (T. Nelson,
iB. of Yorks..sp: 591).
NorFotk.—Two were on the Broads on May 28th, 1905,
and one on April 29th, 1906 (J. H. Gurney, Zool., 1906, p. 127,
and. 1907, jp. 127).
GREY PHALAROPE Phalaropus fulicarius (L.).
S. page 565.
ScoTLanD.—One or two have occurred almost every year
since 1899, and the following have been recorded from the
Outer Hebrides :—Two on November 3rd, 1901, at Island Glass
(Ann. S.N.H., 1902, p. 193); and one at the Flannans on
May 18th, and two on May 19th, 1906 (é.c., 1907, p. 201).
Sule-Skerry :—one on February 15th, 1903 (é.c., 1904, p. 214).
IRELAND.—A male was shot on September 28th, 1899,
near Logan, co. Armagh (A. W. Marsden, Zool., 1899, p. 477).
RED-NECKED PHALAROPE Phalaropus hyperboreus (L.).
S. page 567.
NortH WaALEs.—One was obtained in Merioneth, and one
was watched in Anglesea in 1902 (H. E. Forrest, Vert. F. N.
Wales, p. 340).
IRELAND.—Breeding colony in the west discovered (cf.
Irish Nat., 1903, pp. 41 and 96; Zool., 1903, p. 116; B. B.,
Wol..f., p..174).
WOODCOCK Scolopax rusticula L. 8. page 569.
ScotLaANpD.—Unusual numbers nesting in 1902, 1904, and
1908 (cf. J. A. Harvie-Brown, Ann. S.N.H., 1904, pp. 191
and 245, and 1908, p. 142).
Weight—Records of weights up to 17 oz., a few of 16 oz.,
and many of 15 to 154 oz., in Shetland (R. C. Haldane, Ann.
S.VH., 1906, p. 54).
GREAT SNIPE Gallinago major (J. F. Gm.) 8. page 571.
ScoTLanp.—1901.—Sept. 25th, two Orkney; Sept. 26th,
one Shetland; autumn, one Castle Douglas (Ann. S.N.H.,
1902, p. 54). [One Shetland Sept. 20th, 1904 (é.c., 1905,
p. 54)]. 1905—One Aberdeen Sept. 5th (Zool., 1905, p. 466).
One Orkney Sept. 12th (Ann. S.N.H., 1906, p. 54). 1906—
One Fair Isle Sept. 5th (¢.c., 1907, p. 79).
IRELAND.—Mr. R. J. Ussher gives thirteen records (List of
Irish B., p. 43.).
W eight.—Average of forty-three adult birds shot in August
and September, 7 oz. 5 drs. Three were over 9 oz., and
fifteen over 8 oz., the largest was 1 dram short of 11 oz.
ea-8.T., Preld, 13, v., 99).
( 230 )
PALLAS’S GRASSHOPPER - WARBLER (LOCUS-
TELLA CERTHIOLA) IN IRELAND.
A NEW BRITISH BIRD.
BY
R. M. BARRINGTON, M.B.o.v.
AN immature example of Pallas’s Grasshopper-Warbler
was picked up dead at the Rockabill Lighthouse (five
Pallas’s Grasshopper-Warbler, picked up dead at the Rockabill
Lighthouse (Co. Dublin), on September 28, 1908.
miles off the coast of co. Dublin) on September 28th, 1908,
by the assistant light-keeper—Martin Kennedy. ‘This is
the first recorded occurrence of this bird in the British
Isles, and so far as I can ascertain, it has only once before
been obtained in Europe, viz., by the late Heinrich
Gatke, in Heligoland, where a young bird was caught
PALLAS’S WARBLER IN IRELAND. 231
at the lighthouse lantern on the night of August 12th—
13th, 1856. In 1858, Blasius, when on a visit to this
island, examined the specimen, and called it “‘ the jewel ”’
of Gatke’s collection (cf. H. Gatke, Heligoland, Eng.
Ed., pp. 310 and 312). The breeding range of this bird
appears to extend over Siberia, east of the Yenesei, to
the Pacific, and southwards to the Altai Mountains and
the Amur River, while it occurs in China on passage, and
winters in Burma, India, and the Malay Archipelago.
In habits it seems to be much the same as our Grasshopper-
Warbler, and in appearance it is somewhat similar. A
friend said it resembled a cross between a Hedge-Sparrow
and a Grasshopper-Warbler, but it is markedly larger than
the latter bird, and is of a reddish-brown on the upper
side, the feathers being striped with black, while the tail-
feathers are tipped with greyish-white. The bird was in
plump condition, and was no: “wind-driven,” half-starved,
specimen. Judging by lighthouse specimens it is probable
that many inconspicuous birds visit our shores more
frequently than other records would lead us to suppose.
In this case, however, the rarity of the species in Europe
scarcely suggests this possibility.
The specimen was exhibited on my behalf by Mr. W.
R. Ogilvie-Grant at the meeting of the British Ornith-
ologists’ Club held on October 21st last, and it was
shown by me at the scientific meeting of the Royal
Dublin Society on November 24th. Mr. Pycraft dissected
_ the body and it proved to be a male.
BARRED WARBLER IN LINCOLNSHIRE.
I rinp I have omitted to place on record the occurrence of
the Barred Warbler (Sylvia nisoria) in Lincolnshire in 1905.
On September 4th in that year I shot an immature specimen
of this species in a hedge near the coast at North Cotes. It
is a shy and wild bird, and takes wing more readily than any
of the other warblers.
G. H. Caton Haren.
[This example is referred to in Vol. I., p. 56, of this Magazine,
but as only the bare record was given by Mr. Gurney in the
** Zoologist,’’ from which the occurrence was taken, we are
very glad to publish the details above.—EDs. |
GOLDCRESTS FROM EAST COAST LIGHTHOUSES.
Dr. Harrert regards the British-bred Goldcrest as sub-
specifically distinct from the typical Regulus regulus of
Continental Europe, and has described it under the name of
Regulus requlus anglorum (cf. Vol. I., p. 218). This insular
race he regards as resident (/.c., p. 209). The North European
form, he remarks, frequently crosses over to Great Britain
in flocks in autumn and winter (l.c., p. 218).
If the above views be correct, Goldcrests occurring at
lighthouses on our east coast during the migration seasons
ought to belong to the Continental form and be recognisable
as such. To test this, I recently examined a number of
specimens obtained at the Isle of May and Barnsness light-
houses, at the mouth of the Firth of Forth, and could see no
difference between them and examples from inland woods
—in the north as well as in the south of Scotland—where
the species breeds commonly, and is present all the year round.
But to make sure I have submitted my specimens to Dr.
Hartert for comparison with the series in the Tring Museum,
and he writes me that he is unable to distinguish any of them
from the British race; “they are,’ he repeats, “‘ exactly like
British birds, their colour being darker than in Continental
specimens.” The specimens submitted included ten from
the lighthouses as under :—
6, Isle of May, September 17th, 1885; taken by myself
at the lantern, with other migrants, about 1l pm. A good
many were seen in the course of the night.
NOTES. 233,
2, Isle of May, September 4th, 1908. (For this and sub-
sequent specimens from the May, I am indebted to Mr. Ross,
superintendent of the lighthouse.)
¢ , Barnsness, night of October 1st, 1908 ; along with Larks,
Starlings, etc. (For the Barnsness specimens I have to thank
the lighthouse keepers and Mr. Pow.)
3 oo and one @, Isle of May, night of October 7th.
?, Barnsness, night of October 7th; several with other
migrants.
¢ and 2, Isleof May, night of October 31st, during a great
rush of migrants, including besides Goldcrests, Redwings
(very many), Fieldfares, Ring-Ousels, Owls, Woodcock, ete.
Thus it would seem either that many of our British Goldcrests -
do migrate, or that there are in some part of North Europe
birds which in autumn plumage are indistinguishable from
them. I have long regarded our British Goldcrests as in the
main resident, and the flocks observed at our light stations
in October as coming from Scandinavia or the adjacent parts
of the continent ; and I still incline to this view. The subject,
however, needs further investigation. An examination of
specimens from stations in Orkney and Shetland, for instance,
would be most interesting.
WILLIAM EVANS.
[In September, 1905, I obtained two examples of un-
doubtedly migrating Goldcrests in Norfolk which clearly
belong to the typical and not to the English race. There is
much to be learnt regarding migration in conjunction with the
study of local races.—H. F. W.]
~YELLOW-BROWED WARBLER IN LINCOLNSHIRE.
On October 19th last I found a Yellow-browed Warbler
_(Phylloscopus superciliosus) dead in a hedge near the sea-bank
at North Cotes. There was a great migration of birds in
progress at the time. There were Song-Thrushes in thousands,
hundreds of Robins and Goldcrests, and in less numbers Red-
- wings, Blackbirds, Ring-Ousels, Grey Crows, Chaffinches,
Greenfinches, and Twites, with a few Bramblings, Wheatears,
Rock-Pipits, Woodecocks, Merlins, and Black Redstarts.
This is the second appearance of the Yellow-browed Warbler
in the county. G. H. Caron Haicu.
THE EAST EUROPEAN CHIFFCHAFF IN THE ISLE
OF WIGHT. |
On April 15th, 1907, I received from the lighthouse at
_Niton, Isle of Wight, a single example of Phylloscopus
234 BRITISH BIRDS.
collybita abietina (Nilss.)—the Eastern form of our Chiffchaff.
According to Dr. Hartert, this form breeds in Scandinavia,
East Prussia, Austria, and Hungary, southwards to Bosnia
and Montenegro, and in Russia, south of 65° N. It winters
in Greece, Asia Minor, and North-East and East Africa, but
its migration route and western boundary are still uncertain.
It may be distinguished from our native bird by its slightly
larger size, paler coloration, and longer wing measurements,
which are about 2.5 inches in the male, and 2.25 inches in the
female. This is the first recorded example from this country,
but it seems likely that solitary individuals may occur yearly
in this country on migration, as it would be impossible to
distinguish them from the common Chiffchaff unless they were
obtained.
J. L. BoNnHOTE.
THE NORTHERN RACE OF THE WILLOW-WREN
IN GREAT BRITAIN.
Dvurine the last two years, whilst examining birds and wings
sent from the lighthouses and lightships on the south coast,
I was struck by the fact that there frequently occurred a
Willow-Wren which, though like our breeding Willow-Wrens
superficially, was easily distinguishable from them. On
going into the matter more carefully I found that these birds
in spring differed from ours in the following characters :—
1. The colour of the dorsal parts has a greyish instead of a
yellowish green tint, thus giving the bird a paler appearance.
2. Underparts almost entirely without the yellow which
is seen on our birds in spring plumage, and much paler. |
3. The superciliary stripe usually quite white, and not
yellowish.
Further, I found that these birds do not begin to arrive
in the south of England before the end of April, and that the
majority pass through during the first two weeks of May—
at a time when our own birds are busy breeding.
The race to which these birds evidently belong has been
recognised by Dr. Hartert, and I think quite rightly, under the
name of Phylloscopus trochilus eversmanni (Bonaparte) [in
no way to be confounded with Eversman’s Warbler], and
the distribution which he gives (Die Vég. pal. Faun., p. 509)
is :—the breeding range begins in north Russia, east of Timan
Hills, and extends south to the eastern parts of Perm and
Orenburg ; eastward it is the breeding form of the Ob and
Yenesei, and extends to the mouths of the Lena and Kolyma;
passing through Roumania and Egypt on migration, it winters
in South Africa. I have examined about a dozen examples
NOTES. 235
obtained in Hampshire and Sussex, and half-a-dozen from
the Shetlands, all obtained on the spring migration. Thus
it seems certain that this form of the Willow-Wren occurs
regularly on migration through England and Scotland, and
since I have examples from Finmarken and have seen others
from north Norway obtained in the breeding season, it seems
that the breeding range must be extended further westward
than Dr. Hartert states.
That this subspecies occurs also on the return migration
in autumn is probable, but I know no certain way of
differentiating them from our own birds in autumn plumage.
It is not surprising that it should have hitherto been over-
looked in Great Britain, since it arrives when the leaf is out
and when our birds are nesting, and consequently at a time
when few examples are obtainable for examination.
This is the species described by H. Seebohm as Phylloscopus
gaetker (Ibis, 1877, p. 92).
Six specimens were shown by me at the October meeting
of the British Ornithologists’ Club, all obtained from
Hampshire. C. B. TicEHURST.
NESTING HABITS OF THE MARSH-WARBLER.
I Am interested in Mr. Bunyard’s notes on the Marsh-Warbler
in the November issue. I have had considerable experience
with this species during the last three years in Gloucestershire.
—and as regards the nest, its situation and construction, my
observations confirm those of Mr. Bunyard. The nests
I have seen have been in willow-herb, wormwood, figwort,
meadow-sweet, and nettles, and the clutch generally consists
of five eggs, occasionally only four. The 18th to 24th June
I have found to be the best average date for fresh eggs.
I have, however, failed to notice the “‘ extreme shyness ”’
commented on by Mr. Bunyard. The sitting birds almost
invariably allowed of close observation, and when building
or feeding young were quite unusually careless. The song
is freely uttered throughout the day, although certainly
more so in the late afternoon, and is extraordinarily rich and
melodious. The singing bird generally perches near the top
of a low bush, frequently on the branch of a willow-tree, and
seldom amongst the undergrowth, like the Reed-Warbler.
The eggs are certainly larger than Continental specimens,
and present two distinct types, viz.: (1) the usual and well-
known one; (2) that in which the markings are uniformly
brown. Neither type can possibly be mistaken for eggs of
any other British species. NorRMAN GILROY.
236 BRITISH BIRDS.
AQUATIC WARBLER IN SUSSEX. ‘
On October 7th last I had the good fortune to shoot an
Aquatic Warbler (Acrocephalus aquaticus) on the Eastbourne
Crumbles. I have for the last fifteen years examined every
Sedge-Warbler I have seen in the hopes of finding an Aquatic.
Aquatic Warbler, Eastbourne, Sussex, October 7, 1908.
(Drawn by E. C. Arnold.)
This bird put its head out of a single tamarisk bush on the
shingle, and I at once felt sure it was a rarity, the eyestripe
being most pronounced. The sketch which I made of it shows
the wedge-shaped character of the tail, which seems to me a
NOTES. 237
striking feature of the species. I judge the bird to be immature,
and the legs were of a very light flesh-colour. The wind at
the time was south-east, and the weather fine and hot.
K. C. ARNOLD.
BLUE-HEADED WAGTAIL IN NORFOLK.
On September 23rd, 1908, one of the wildfowlers of Cley,
Norfolk, shot, at that place, an adult male Blue-headed
Wagtail (Motacilla flava flava). The bird was examined by
Mr. Witherby, and exhibited by him on my behalf at the
meeting of the British Ornithologists’ Club, held on
November 18th last.
F. I. Ricwarps.
AUTUMN AND WINTER SINGING OF BUNTINGS.
Wits regard to Mr. Oldham’s note on the singing of a Cirl
Bunting in October, it was recorded some years ago in the
** Zoologist ’ by Professor Salter, that this species sings from
time to time throughout the winter in Wales. My brother
and I heard one at Reigate on October 31st this year, singing
in the morning and afternoon at the same place. The follow-
ing day I heard another. Between October 10th and 15th
on very warm days I heard several Yellowhammers, one of
them in full song, near Tunbridge Wells, and my brother
heard a Corn-Bunting singing in Romney Marsh on October
13th. We had not previously heard either of these two
species singing after the moult, and I think in the case of the
Yellowhammer at any rate, it is abnormal. We have not
heard any Reed-Buntings singing, however. As far as we
have observed, all the Corn-Buntings leave this part of the
country for the winter, so that there is no chance of hearing
them; Yellowhammers are also a good deal less common,
and begin to sing as soon as they return in February. Between
November 12th and 20th, while staying in Hayling Island,
Hants. I have heard Cirl and Corn-Buntings singing a good
deal, even on cool and sunless days. aie cat eee
WirH reference to a note on a Cirl Bunting singing in October
(antea, p. 204), I find by my notes kept over some years at
Clevedon, in Somerset, that I have records of this bird’s song
in every month in the year, my earliest date being January
8th, and my latest December 18th. ie Mian
In the Mendip district of Somerset the Cirl Bunting sings
intermittently throughout the winter. One has been singing
here at Winscombe on more days than it has been silent
238 BRITISH BIRDS.
during the last four weeks (1 write on November 17th). I
see that I noted it as singing on November 16th last year,
and in January, 1907, I heard two birds in full song near
Glastonbury. In my experience the Cir! Bunting does not
sing in winter unless the weather is both still and mild—as
an instance, the bird here was silent during the week of colder
weather earlier in the month. The Corn-Bunting, on the
contrary, may be tempted into song on a very cold frosty
morning, provided there is bright sunlight.
C. I. Evans.
LITTLE BUNTINGS IN IRELAND AND NORFOLK.
On October 2nd, 1908, a female specimen of the Little Bunting
(Emberiza pusilla) was picked up at the Rockabill Lighthouse
(off the coast of co. Dublin) and forwarded to me. The bird
was exhibited on my behalf by Mr. W. R. Ogilvie-Grant at
the meeting of the British Ornithologists’ Club held on
October 21st last. The Little Bunting has not previously
been recorded from Ireland.
R. M. BaRRIneTOoN.
Mr. H. N. Pasuuey, the well-known taxidermist of Cley-next-_
the Sea, Norfolk, has sent me an adult female example of the
Little Bunting (Hmberiza pusilla), which was brought to him
on October 19th by a local gunner, who had shot the bird ~
that day. Five examples of this bird have been previously
recorded as occurring in England, thirteen in Scotland, and
one in Ireland (cf. antea, Vol. L., pp. 249, 291, 383, 385, and
above). This appears to be the first record for Norfolk.
Nine years ago, when Howard Saunders published the
second edition of his “ Manual,” only one example of this
species was known to have occurred in this country. Mr.
Eagle Clarke, I may remind my readers, found on Fair Isle,
the Little Bunting in some numbers amongst flocks of Twites,
and it thus may very easily escape notice.
I had the pleasure of exhibiting the bird at the meeting of
the British Ornithologists’ Club, held on November 18th
last.
H. F. WIrHERBY.
THE GREAT SPOTTED WOODPECKER AS A
BREEDING BIRD IN SCOTLAND.
WE have already referred to the interesting spread of the
Great Spotted Woodpecker in Scotland (cf. Vol. I., p. 280).
Mr. J. A. Harvie-Brown* now provides a valuable paper on
* «Ann. §.N.H.,’’ 1908, pp. 209—216 (with map).
NOTIES. 239
the subject, while Mr. W. Evans* discusses the very interesting
question as to whether the birds, which are now thoroughly
established in the south-eastern half of Scotland, owe their
origin to England or Scandinavia. At one time nesting in
the faunal area of Moray, the Great Spotted Woodpecker
became extinct asa breeding species in Scotland between 1841
and 1851. Since that date there have been a number of autumn-
winter irruptions, chiefly on the east coast, of presumably
Scandinavian birds. In 1887 the first brood since the ex-
tinction of the bird as a nester was found, and this at Duns
Castle woods, in Berwickshire. From that date it gradually
extended, and its breeding range now embraces practically
the whole of the south-eastern half of Scotland, although
it seems strangely absent from Fife and Kinross. All this
is well traced by Mr. Harvie-Brown, who illustrates his paper
with an excellent map. It may be noted that a breeding
record for Aberdeen (cf. antea, Vol. I., p. 281) is omitted.
Dr. Hartert has lately} shown us that the English Great
Spotted Woodpecker (D. major anglicus) differs from the
Scandinavian bird chiefly by its smaller and more slender bill
and shorter wing, and Mr. Evans finds that three of these
Scottish breeding birds belong to the English race. This
fact points to the conclusion that Scotland is being repopulated
from England, and not by the Scandinavian visitants, and it
is hoped that more specimens may be examined to prove the
contention conclusively. |
The study of geographical races has only just begun in this
country, but many of us have long been confident that a
thorough appreciation of geographical forms would teach us
very much (and notably in connection with migration
problems) which is unknown, and even unsuspected, concerning
the avifauna of the British Isles. Mr. Evans’ observations
are, therefore, very welcome.
H. F. WitruHersy.
COURTING PERFORMANCE OF THE CUCKOO.
In his interesting notes on the Common Cuckoo in India, in
your issue of November, Major Magrath calls attention to
“a semi-upright attitude” assumed when uttering the call-
note. ‘The following note in my diary may be of interest :—
“May 12th, 1905.—Two Cuckoos alighted in one of the trees
beside the lawn where I was sitting, a third alighting a little
way off. Two of the birds I judged males from their
behaviour. The one nearest me became very excited, uttering
* t.c., 216—218. {+ BririsH Birps, Vol. I., p. 221.
240 BRITISH BIRDS.
the ordinary as well as the three-syllable call-note all the
time. His movements reminded me of the domestic male
Pigeon paying court to his female. He kept raising his body
to an upright position, spreading out his feathers, especially
those of the tail, and spinning round on his perch, exactly as
does the Pigeon. During this exhibition the female remained
silent. Thereafter all three birds flew away.”
T. THoRNTON MACKEITH.
LITTLE OWL IN WARWICKSHIRE.
In connection with the spread of the Little Owl (Athene
noctua) which formed the subject of an article in a recent
number of this Magazine (wde Bb. B., Vol. I., p. 335), it is
interesting to note that these birds have now reached
Warwickshire. Messrs. Spicer & Son, taxidermists, Bir-
mingham, now have in their possession a specimen which was
killed at Sutton Coldfield quite recently, though I am un-
fortunately unable to give the exact date.
A. G. LEIGH.
A REMARKABLE VARIETY OF THE RED-LEGGED
PARTRIDGE IN ESSEX.
THROUGH the generosity of Mr. Ruggles Brise, the British
Museum of Natural History has just acquired a very remark-
able variety of the Red-legged Partridge (Caccabis rufa) killed
at Braintree on October 20th.
This bird, a male, has the crown, sides of the head and throat,
dull black. The upper part normal. The neck, breast and
flanks, however, are of a uniform rich dark brown, but show
faint traces of the characteristic barring of the flanks when
held in certain lights. On the breast is a white patch, recalling
the horseshoe of the English Partridge. No similar variety
has, we believe, ever been recorded, though white specimens
have several times been met with. A bird “ with a white
breast-band,’ according to Yarrell’s ‘“ British Birds,” was
obtained in the Haute Garonne in November, 1872, and
similar varieties, it is interesting to note, ‘“‘ were captured
at the same season in the years 1873 and 1874.”
W. P. Pycorary
GREY PHALAROPE IN CO. WEXFORD.
On November 11th I was duck shooting with a friend on the
south side of Wexford Harbour and saw a bird which I
identified as a Grey Phalarope. We were by the side of a
“pill? (an inlet from the sea containing brackish water,
as it receives the drainage from the marshes) when a small
NOTES. 241
bird flew past and alighted upon the water about thirty yards
away. It then slightly lowered one wing, inclined its head
to that side, bobbed, or ducked, two or three times, and
turned partly around. I thought it was wounded, and so
did our retriever, who dashed in to get it, and disturbed it
before it completed the turning movement. The bird would
fly about thirty yards and alight upon the water, swimming
easily and lightly, and made six or seven flights, always within
gunshot, during nearly ten minutes. It twice more started
to turn and bob, causing the dog to rush at it, and once
allowed the dog to get within a yard before rising. The bird
was in a foot to fifteen inches of water. I was much struck
with the compact, neat, and graceful appearance of the bird,
while its tameness was in marked contrast to the wildness of
the various other kinds of Plovers we saw. It was blue-grey
above, and very pure white upon head and breast. Un-
fortunately I had not got my Goerz glasses with me, but I
noted its two most conspicuous markings—a black patch on
the nape of the neck extending partly forward with spots or a
faint line, and, when flying, two rows, or one broad row,
of light feathers across the secondaries (I could not notice
whether the primaries were marked so) giving the appearance
almost as if this portion of the wing was cut out.
R. C. BANnKs.
[In his “ List of Irish Birds”? Mr. R. J. Ussher refers to
this species as an “irregular visitor in autumn and early
winter, chiefly in October and in bad weather.’’——-H.F.W. |
BUFF-BREASTED SANDPIPER IN LINCOLNSHIRE.
THouGH somewhat late to do so, it may be as well to place
on record the occurrence of the Buff-breasted Sandpiper
(Tringites rufescens) in Lincolnshire.
I shot an example of this American species on the foreshore
at North Cotes on September 20th, 1906. The bird singularly
resembled a Reeve both in appearance and flight, and but for
its small size I should have paid little attention to it.
It was by no means shy, and allowed me to approach it
within thirty yards on the open saltings. This is, I believe,
the first appearance of this species in the county.
G. H. Caton Haten.
SABINE’S GULL IN LINCOLNSHIRE.
On September 28th last I shot an example of Sabine’s Gull
(Xema sabinit) off Gramthorpe Haven. It was a young
bird, in the plumage in which this species usually occurs in
this country. It was sitting alone on a sandbank, though
242 BRITISH BIRDS.
there were large flocks of other Gulls in the immediate
neighbourhood. Its note was singularly like that of the
Arctic Tern.
During the latter part of September and the beginning of
October considerable numbers of Skuas, Gannets, Divers,
and Shearwaters passed along the Lincolnshire coast.
G. H. Caton Haiacu.
LATE NESTS OF THE GREAT CRESTED AND
LITTLE GREBES.
Wirth reference to Mr. A. G. Leigh’s note on the late nesting
of Grebes (antea, p. 171), on searching my note-book I find
the following entries : ‘‘ Sept. 7th, 07, Roddlesworth Reservoir
(Brinscall, Lancs.), a nest of the Little Grebe (Podicipes fluvi-
atilis) containing four eggs; the bird left her eggs uncovered,
but I was unable to ascertain how much they were incubated
because of several feet of deep water intervening.” ‘“‘ Sept.
8th, 07, in a pond close by my house I discovered another
nest of the Little Grebe with two eggs; these eggs were not
incubated and no more were laid; they hatched safely.”
Even allowing that these were second, or possibly third nests,
they were, I think, remarkably late for a moorland district.
W. Mackay Woop.
[In reference to Mr. Leigh’s expression of doubt as_ to
whether the Great Crested Grebe is double-brooded, the
Rev. F. C. R. Jourdain writes that he has tolerably conclusive
evidence of one case where two broods were reared by one
pair of Great Crested Grebes. In 1907 a pair had large young
on June 13that Osmaston. On October 6th Mr. J. Henderson
reported a pair on the same pond accompanied by four young
in down, which looked not much larger than Dabchicks. Mr,
Jourdain adds that the eggs of this bird have been taken
from April to September, which is strong, though not con-
clusive, evidence—since late nests may be the result of the
destruction of previous eggs or broods—of their being
double-brooded. Mr. Jourdain gives the following references :—
Karly dates—April 13th, 1888, 1 egg (C. R. Gawen, Zool., 1889,
p- 19); April 26th, 1881, 2 eggs (J. H. Gurney, t.c., 1881), Late
dates—July 22nd, 1898, nests with 3, 4, and 5 eggs in North
Ireland, and other nests with eggs on September Ist (C. B.
Horsburgh, Field, October 29th, 1898). More recent records
of late nesting were on September 18th, 1904, when Mr. C.
Oldham saw downy young ones (Zool., 1905, p. 37), and this
year, on October 10th, when Mr. O. V. Aplin saw an old bird
in ‘‘ practically full summer plumage,” with two half-grown
NOTES. 243
young (t.c., 1908, p. 407). Howard Saunders does not appear
to ai this bind as double-brooded, and perhaps it is only
so when certain favourable conditions prevail.—H.F.W.]
SOOTY SHEARWATERS IN SUSSEX, KENT, AND
YORKSHIRE.
Durine September and October three specimens of the Sooty
Shearwater (Puffinus griseus) were shot on the coast of Sussex
and Kent, and, as I was enabled to examine each of them
in the flesh, I venture to place the occurrences on record.
The particulars are as follows: (1) a 3. East Bay, Dungeness,
September 26th, 1908; (2) a 9, Cliff End, Pett, near
Winchelsea, October 14th, 1908; and (3) a ¢@, off Bexhill,
October 21st, 1908.
W. Ruskin BUTTERFIELD.
I have a note from Mr. W. J. Clarke, of Scarborough, of
one of these birds obtained some miles off the coast of
Yorkshire on October 6th last.—H. F. WirHeErsy.
an Guards
LESSER WHITETHROAT NESTING IN Forrar.—A correction.
—In reference to the supposed nesting of this bird in Forfar
in June, 1907 (antea, Vol. I., p. 126) Mr. T. L. Dewar has
submitted one of the eggs to Mr. Eagle Clarke, who pronounces
it to be that of a Common Whitethroat (cf: Ann. S.N.Z.,
1908, p. 254).
PROBABLE NESTING OF WHITE WAGTAIL IN SCOTLAND.—
Two were seen in the middle of July at Killilan, North-west
Highlands, and one had food in its bill (P. Anderson, Ann.
S.N.H., 1908, p. 253).
PROBABLE NESTING OF BLUE-HEADED WAGTAIL NEAR
ABERDEEN.—Between May 19th—July 31st a pair of Motacilla
flava flava was often observed frequenting the banks of a burn
on the links near Aberdeen. On July 8th the female was
carrying food, and the behaviour of the birds always seemed
to show that they had a nest, although this was not found.
An accurate description of the birds is given (L. N. G. Ramsay,
Ann. S.N.H., 1908, p. 253).
Hawsincuns IN ScoTLaAnD.—An old bird and a young one
were seen at Lauder, Berwickshire, in August, 1908 (W.
M’Conachie). A female was accidentally captured on April
9th, 1908, at Grove Gardens, Galloway, in which county the
bird has been recorded from time to time for many years
(R. Service, Ann. S.N.H., 1908, pp. 252 and 253).
Q44, ' BRITISH BIRDS
RosE-COLOURED STARLING IN CArrHNEss.—A specimen of
Pastor roseus was shot at Dunbeath on July 11th, 1907 (Ann.
S.N.H., 1908, p. 195).
NicutsARS BREEDING IN Capriviry.—An extraordinary
case of a pair of Nightjars breeding in captivity is recorded
by Mrs. Heinroth, wife of Dr. O. Heinroth, of the Berlin
Zoological Gardens. In November, 1906, a male bird was
obtained, and was kept with great care through the winter.
In the following spring a mate was procured, and pairing
took place at the end of May. The male made a nesting
place by scraping in a peccary-skin rug in the dining room.
An egg was laid on June 2nd and another on the 4th. The
hen bird did most of the sitting; but the male occasionally
relieved her. On June 18th the first egg was chipped, and
hatched on the morning of the 20th, while the second egg
hatched on the afternoon of the same day. The young fed
at first by taking the parents’ beaks as far as the nostrils
into theirown. On June 24th the old birds again paired,
and on July 3rd and 5th eggs were laid in the same spot
upon the rug. Incubation in this case lasted eighteen days
as against sixteen anda quarter in the first case, the longer
time being accounted for by the fact that the old bird
allowed the eggs to cool several times. The tameness of
these Nightjars is described as extraordinary—the six birds
flying about the room, taking no notice of strangers, and
being quite ready to settle on the shoulder or take food
from the hand (Die Gefiedeste Welt, xxxvii., 29-31, 33-4, and
wield, Mite, "O8.qy, 717).
RED-FOOTED Fatcon 1n NorroLtK.—The Rev. Julian G.
Tuck records the occurrence of a female Falco vespertinus,
which was shot near Sandringham about the middle of June
last (Zool., 1908, p. 394).
ScorTish HEeronries.—Mr. H. Boyd Watt gives a list of
230 Scottish breeding places of the Heron, but of these he
marks forty-five as now not occupied, while many others
appear to be tenanted by only a pair or two. (Ann. S.N.H.,
1908, pp. 218-223).
PurrPLE Heron In CalTHNEss.—A young male Ardea
purpurea is reported on the Thrumster Estate on September
16th, 1907 (Ann. S.N.H., 1908, p. 199).
GLossy Isises IN NORTHUMBERLAND AND CORNWALL.—A
party of five Plegudis falcinellus arrived near Alnmouth on
August 30th. Four (two of which are said to be in
immature plumage) were secured during the following ten
NOTES. 245
days (E. L. Gill, Zool., 1908, p. 394). One was ‘lately’ shot
near Land’s End (H. Welch, Field, 24, x., 08, p. 721).
_ Matiarp Hatcnine In Ocroser.—A Wild Duck hatched
out thirteen young in the middle of October at Thames Ditton
(R. Porter, Feld; 24, x., 08, p. 721).
PROBABLE NESTING OF THE GADWALL IN SCOTLAND.—I'wo
pairs of Anas strepera were under observation in a certain
loch in the east of Scotland this year from the middle of May
until the end of June, and they were doubtless nesting there
(W. Evans, Ann. S.N.H., 1908, p. 254).
INCREASE OF. SHOVELERS IN ‘TIREE. — Reported to be
increasing yearly as a breeding species (P. Anderson, Ann.
Nua, 1908, p. 252).
MarkED TEAu.—A hand-reared Teal marked at Netherby,
Cumberland, this year, was shot on Lough Derg on September
28th (R. Graham, Field, 24, x., 08, p. 745).
GARGANEY IN SHETLAND.—A male Querquedula circia is
reported from Baltasound on April 14th, 1907 (Ann. S.N.H.,
1908, p. 200).
PaLLAs’s SAND-GROUSE IN YORKSHIRE.—Two records of
a few birds each have been reported (antea, pp. 98 and 134)
of Syrrhaptes paradoxus in Yorkshire during the recent
irruption of this bird. Mr. W. H. St. Quintin now records
(Naturalist, 1908, p. 420) that a flock of 30 to 40 was noticed
early in June near Knapton. A considerable number remained
at any rate until the beginning of October. The flock appears
never to have broken up into pairs, although it certainly
decreased, and there is no evidence that the birds ever
attempted to breed.
PRATINCOLE AT THE FLANNAN IsLANDS.—An adult female
Glareola pratincola was obtained on July 13th, 1908, at this
out-of-the-way spot. It is the third example of the species
obtained in Scotland (W. Eagle Clarke, Ann. S.N.H., 1908,
p- 256).
THE POSITION OF THE EAR IN THE Woopcock.—In the
October issue of the “Ibis” Mr. W. P. Pycraft contributes
a short paper on the position of the ear in the Woodcock,
in the course of which he controverts the contention of
Professor D’ Arcy Thomson, that the peculiar conditions which
prevail in the matter of the position of the ear in the Scolo-
pacide are due to the shifting of the beak in relation to the
base of the skull. Mr. Pycraft now shows that the matter
is not thus to be explained ; but, on the contrary, is due to
the shortening of the base of the skull, which has had the
246 BRITISH BIRDS.
effect of drawing the hinder part of the skull, and with it the
aperture of the ear, downwards and forwards, and this point
is demonstrated by means of a series of diagrams.
MarkED Woopcock.—Mr. John Hamilton has for four
seasons marked young Woodcock at Baron’s Court, co.
Tyrone, with a nickel ring engraved “ B.C.,” with the year
in figures. The results, as far as known, are as follows, but,
unfortunately, the dates of the captures are not given :—
Number accounted for.
Ss
= —
Breeding Number In first In second In third Not
season. marked. season. Place. season. Place. season. traced.
1905 15 1 Home i Home Nil 13
3D Home
1906 68 1 Home 1 Cornwall} — 60
L Harrow
1907 65 _ — -- os — 65
: Near ) ;
1908 ei 1 { Inverness __ = 7: 62
Total 211 200
(Field, 17, x., 08, p. 717, and 24, x., 08, p. 745).
SABINE’S GULL IN THE INNER HEBRIDES.—A specimen of
Xema sabinii is recorded from Skerryvore on November 30th,
1907 (Ann. S.N.H., 1908, p. 205).
GREAT CRESTED GREBE IN SHETLAND.—An example of
Podicipes cristatus was seen at Spiggie on January 11th, 1907
(Ann, SN... 1908; p. 207).
=) ia) SN
‘Nan
‘We og
STEWS
Report on the Immigrations of Summer Residents in the
Spring of 1907: also Notes on the Migratory Movements
during the Autumn of 1906. By the Committee appointed
by the British Ornithologists’ Club. (Forming Vol. XXIL.,
Bull. B.O.C. Edited by W. R. Ogilvie-Grant). 31 Maps.
Witherby & Co. 6s.
Tuis, the third Annual Report of the B.O.C. Migration Com-
mittee, although drawn up in the same form as previous
reports, is rather more ambitious in that it includes some
notes on autumn movements. These are too incomplete,
however, to have much value, but we welcome the promise
of a more elaborate record of autumn movements in the
next report. In our notice (antea, Vol. I., p. 30) of the
second ‘“‘ Report,’ we questioned the accuracy of the
table which shows the areas of the arrival of the various
species, and curiously enough in the present ‘“‘ Report” this
table (p. 11) is not free from blemish, the White Wagtail
being entered as arriving solely in the western half of the south
coast, whereas in the detailed summary on page 107, as well
as in the map, it is shown to have been reported first in Kent,
and similarly the table does not tally with the summaries
and maps in the cases of the House-Martin and Common
Sandpiper. It would be as well, perhaps, to omit this table
in future, or it may become permanently misleading, since
even when it is corrected it is obvious by a comparison of the
three “‘ Reports’ that the points of non-arrival-seem due in
a great measure to want of observation. ach successive
** Report,’ indeed, makes one realise more and more how
little even the best observer is able accurately to record of
the movements of migrants, and only an average of the
results taken over a long period, as the Committee have
from the first insisted, can lead to any reliable conclusions.
Some interesting points recorded in this volume may here
be summarized. March, 1907, was brilliantly fine, but the
whole of April was wintry; the effect being that stragglers
arrived at early dates, but the main body of birds was delayed,
with the result that the “ waves” of immigrants were less
marked, and the period of migration was extended. The
Blackcap was noted by many observers to be less numerous
than usual in 1907. Chiffchaffs were seen at Penzance
throughout the winter. The Cuckoo was reported on
March 26th (Gloucester), 29th (Hereford), 30th—31st
248 BRITISH BIRDS.
(Wilts.), 31st (Dorset, Hants., Gloucester). The Land-Rail
was neither heard nor seen in 1907 by observers in Hants.,
Sussex, Middlesex, Essex, Bucks., Herts., or Suffolk, and only
once in Kent, twice in Berks. and Lincoln, and thrice in
Norfolk. It seemed practically confined during the year
under notice to the western counties. A specimen of the
Continental Robin (Hrithacus rubecula rubecula), which is
common on migration on the east coast, was taken on April
7th at St. Catherine’s Point, Isle of Wight. On page 180
the curious statement is made that the Dartford Warbler is
rarely seen in winter in Hampshire!
In conclusion, we can unreservedly recommend the present
and the two previous “ Reports’ to every student of migra-
tion, and we may add that the B.O.C. Committee and its many
helpers all over the country by no means labour in vain.
A Last of Irish Birds. By BR. J. Ussher, M.R.I.A., M.B.0.U.
Dublin: A. Thom & Co. 4d.
Tus is a very useful up-to-date “ abbreviated text book ”
on Irish birds. Mr. Ussher has placed within square brackets
those American land birds which have been recorded from
Ireland, and, on the whole, this is perhaps wise, although in
a case suchas the Yellow-billed Cuckoo, which has now occurred
so many times in England, although seldom in Ireland, the
rule might, perhaps, have been relaxed. Amongst other
birds placed within square brackets we may mention the
Noddy Tern, which has long been accorded a_ regular
place upon the British list on the basis of two examples recorded
by Thompson as having been obtained between the Tuskar
Lighthouse and the Bay of Dublin about 1830. The birds
were brought into port skinned, and we think that Mr. Ussher
is perfectly right in not admitting them, more especially as the
taxidermist who was responsible for the record was proved
to have been unreliable in the case of two Belted Kingfishers
supposed to have been shot a few years later. Of positive
information additional to that given in the author’s well-
known ‘ Birds of Ireland,” there is very little, but we note
the following, which do not appear to have been recorded
elsewhere :—Five occurrences (against three in Saunders’
Manual) of the Red-breasted Flycatcher are noted, but no dates
are given; an example of the Serin Finch, the second for
Ireland, was taken on January 3lst, 1907; a third specimen
of the Lapland Bunting was taken alive at Kilbarrack on
December 12th, 1907 ; the Jay is extending its range, and has
spread into Kildare and Meath ; a pair of Pochards, with their
young, were identified by Mr. R. Patterson in June, 1907,
in Monaghan. H.W
: RITISH
DIRDS
ANILUSTRATED-MAGAZINE.
DEVOTEDTOTHEBIRDS ON
=> THE BRIT LST ©
JANUARY 1, Ae Vol. I.
1909. ie No. 8.
-MONTHLY- ONE:SHILLING- NET
S2OHIGIHOLBOPNICS
{ NAUMANN'S “BIRDS OF MIDDLE EUROPE.” |
NAUMANN (J. F.). “N aturgeschichte der Vogel Mitteleuropas. » Neubear-
beitet von Prof. R. Blasius, W. Blasius, R. Buri und herausgegeben von
Carl R. Hennicke. Jubitdums-Prachtausgabe.
430 PLATES BEAUTIFULLY REPRODUCED IN COLOUR from drawings by the
well-known Bird Painter J. G. Keulemans, Bruno Geisler, E. de Maes
» . and others.
12 Vols. Folio, Dresden, 1896—1904. nen
Bound in half cloth, £6 10s. net. Bound in half morocco, £8. 8s._ net.
a ha | copy of this Work in cloth was ney ats By ae eeen at Messrs. Hodgson’s :
Salerooms for s.
WILLIAMS & NORGATE, 14, Henrietta Street, Covent Garden, London, W. C.
DALLMEYER'S
Naturalists’ Camera,
1907. MODEL,
For Telephoto or: Ordinary LENSES.
DALLMEYER’S
Lenses are used
by the most
| skilled Bird
Photographers.
The following are
specially | recommended
THE STIGMATIC. SERIES Il. F/6 (Convertible.)
THE SERIES D PATENT PORTRAIT LENSES F 6. ae
(A. Rapid Long Focus Lens ata Moderate Price.) . Ht sec |
High or Moderate Power Telephoto Lenses (Original Make). : Monee:
We are Specialists in Cameras and Apparatus for Photo-Ornithlogsts : ‘o
CATALOGUES AND ADVICE FREE.
J. H. DALLMEYER, LIMITED, DENZIL RD.,
Showrooms: 25, NEWMAN ade WwW. NEASDEN, LONDON, NW. ¥ : 1.
WATKINS & DONCASTER,
Waturalists, ye
And maiatienurars of CABINETS and APPARATUS for Entomology, Birds’ Fees ah ins
and Skins, and all Branches of Natural-History. | | ee
A LARGE ‘STOCK OF INSECTS, and BIRDS’ EGGS and SKINS. a
Speciality: -—Obiects for Nature Study, Drawing Classes, &. > .
BIRDS, MAMMALS, &c.; PRESERVED and MOUNTED by FIRST-CLASS WORKMEN Hews 3
TRUE TO NATURE. Se Une §
All Books and Publications on Natural History vophlied,
36, STRAND, LONDON, W.C. (Five Doors from Charing ts) . a
Catalogue (ipa pp.) Post: ® free.
DNITESABIRDS
TATE ED BY. oH. F. WITHERBY, .F.ZS, M:B.0.U.
Palate BY: W. P. PYCRAFT, ALS, MB.O.U.
CoNTENTS OF NuMBER 8, Vou. II. January 1, 1909.
A Tame Snipe and its Habits, by Hugh Wormald. .. Page 249
Some Early British Ornithologists and their Works, by
W. H. Mullens, m.a., Lu.M., m.B.0.U. VI.—Thomas
Pennant (1726-1798). Mr iM 259
On the More Important Additions to our enemas of
British Birds since 1899, by H. F. Witherby and N. F.
Ticehurst. Part XVI.—(continued from page 229) .. 267
The Greenland Wheatear (Sazicola enanthe leucorr a Py
C. B. Ticehurst, M.A., M.R.C.S., M.B.0.U. .. 271
Notes :—The Jubilee of the British patton oe
(Eds.). The British Ornithologists’ Union and Rare
Breeding Birds (Eds.). Irish Birds (H.F.W.). Rare
Birds in Ireland (W. J. Williams). Albinistic Variety
of the Redwing (Evelyn V. Baxter and Leonora Jeffrey
Rintoul). The Northern Marsh-Titmouse in England
(W. R. Ogilvie-Grant). The First British Example of
the Red-throated Pipit (M. J. Nicoll and N. F. Tice-
hurst). Richard’s Pipit in Norfolk (H. F. Witherby).
Some Sussex Ravens (Lt.-Col. H. W. Feilden). Little Owl
in North-West Oxfordshire (W. Warde Fowler). Scaup-
Ducks in Nottinghamshire in the Spring and Summer
of 1908 (J. Whitaker). Amputation of Lapwing’s
Toes by Means of Wool (Henry B. Elton). Black-necked
Grebes in North Lancashire (H. W. Robinson). Leach’s
Fork-tailed Petrels in Cumberland and _ Lancashire
(Ea W.. ore Bulwer’s Petrelin Sussex - F.W.).
Short Notes. : y 274
Review :—Bird- Hea iiponal Wild neces He nie 284
A TAME SNIPE AND ITS HABITS.
BY
HUGH WORMALD.
Havine been asked to write a few notes on my tame
Snipe for BritisH Brirps, I cannot do better than relate
his history from the beginning. He was hatched in my
incubator on May 11th, 1908, incubation having lasted
250 BRITISH BIRDS.
twenty days, at a temperature of 102° Fah. He
remained in the incubator for twenty-four hours or so,
drying off, before he had his first meal. There is no
prettier young bird than a Snipe in down, the colour of
which is a rich reddish-brown, speckled with black, and
here and there tipped with white. Unfortunately a
pen and ink drawing (Fig. 1) cannot do justice to the bird
at this stage. The combination of colours renders the
chick extremely difficult to find in its natural surroundings,
even when one knows to within a foot or so where it is
hiding, and I may mention that a spaniel is a very
Fic. 1.—A day old.
(Drawn by H. Wormald.)
‘useful aid in searching for both eggs and young of
Plover, Redshank, and Snipe.
For the first two days of his existence my young Snipe
ran backwards instead of forwards. I believe this is
the case in a wild state. The young do not pick up food
for themselves, like most young waders, but the parents
feed them from the bill. I had for some time believed
this to be the case, and was glad to have my opinion
verified a short time ago by Mr. Richard Kearton, who
informed me that he had watched a male Snipe feeding
his offspring in this way. In consequence of this habit,
I had to feed my young Snipe entirely by hand for the
H. WORMALD:.A SNIPE AND ITS HABITS. 251
first: fortnight, the food then consisting of small worms,
of which he devoured an enormous quantity. As soon,
however, as he had learnt to feed himself he took to
maggots, and any small animacule that he could find
while probing at the edge of a pond, or in mud which I
dug up and gave to him in a pan.
The first signs of feathers appeared on the shoulders
on May 17th. The feathering was very rapid, the feathers
of the tail and the back of the neck being the last to
appear. Fig. 2 shows the bird at this stage of develop-
ment. By the beginning of July he was quite grown up
<
Fic. 2.—As he appeared at the end of May.
(Drawn by H. Wormald.)
and fully feathered. During the last week in September
he commenced his first moult by losing his tail-feathers,
the two outer ones being the last to fall. The moult
was completed about a month later. On October 18th my
brother winged a Common Snipe, which I took home alive,
and this bird I take to be also a bird of the year, owing
to the facé that it (I do not know the sex) was in exactly
the same state of moult as my hand-reared bird. Adults
begin to moult during the end of July, and I have
constantly seen them during the first week in August
with their wing-feathers in full moult, but immature birds,
252 BRITISH BIRDS.
as is commonly the case with waders, do not moult their
primaries at all in their first autumn.
‘‘ John ” (as my tame Snipe is christened) is exceedingly
sluggish, and I believe that all Snipe are naturally so
when undisturbed. He lives in a cage in the smoking-
room, and sits every evening on a board in front
of the fire. On being taken out of his cage and placed
Fie. 3.—Preening his Feathers.
(Photographed by P. H. Bahr.)
on the board his usual procedure is to give himself
a shake (this he always does after being handled),
and then eat two or three worms, after which he
retires as near the fire as he can get, and ‘suns ”
himself for some little time. He then has another worm
or two, preens his feathers (Fig. 3), and rests, either
standing on one leg or squatting down on the board.
Occasionally he varies this procedure by taking a bath,
H. WORMALD: A SNIPE AND ITS HABITS. 2538
and very rarely he will hover round the room. His
attitudes while sunning himself are very extravagant.
He leans right over to one side and spreads his tail out into
a fan, the outside tail-feathers nearest the fire only being
extended beyond the rest. This is curious, for while
bleating both outer tail-feathers are extended far beyond
Fic. 4.—Giving his Feathers a shake.
(Photographed by P. H. Bahr.)
the rest. He also raises the wing nearest the fire to get
all the heat possible under the feathers. He continues
in this attitude for a few minutes, then gives his feathers
a shake (Fig. 4), turns round, and “suns” the other
side.
The bill of the Snipe is known to be extraordinarily
254 BRITISH BIRDS.
flexible, and this is well shown as the bird yawns, when
the last inch or so of the upper mandible is raised upwards.
This movement is thought to be effected by the
endotympanic muscle first described in 1748 by Hérissant*
who, however, did not realise its function. Later the
movement of the bill was described and figured in Bronn’s
‘Thier Reich” (Taf IV.,fig.1). Mr. Pycraftt has observed
the same thing in the Dunlin, and Dr. R. W. Shufeld,t
in Wilson’s Snipe and the American Woodcock. It would
appear that in all the T'rochili and Scolopacide the anterior
part only of the upper mandible is movable.§ Mr. W. H.
Workman|) has written a paper on this subject, and has
proved the endotympanic to be especially well developed
in this species, and suggests that it acts by pulling the
quadrate and maxillary bones forward, thus tilting the
premaxillary upwards, which then gives at its most flexible
portion, situated one inch from the tip of the bill. The
use of this movement is obvious, in that it enables the
bird when probing to grasp a worm underground, without
even opening its bill, so that the tongue can draw the
prey into the mouth. The flexibility of ‘‘ John’s ” bill can
also be noticed when he is trying to take a worm off a:
hard flat surface, for then the tip of the upper mandible
bends downwards.
His food, now that maggots are not procurable,
consists entirely of worms, though I am _ endeavour-
ing to teach him to eat raw liver, for worms will be
very difficult to obtain during prolonged frost. He
feeds entirely by “ feel,” being unable to see a worm right
under him, but if one is placed two or three inches in front
of him, he catches sight of it at once and walks up to it,
then feels about with his bill until he touches it, when it
is instantly swallowed. This shows the sensibility of the
bill. He can also instantly distinguish between raw
liver and a worm as soon as they come in contact with his
* « Histoire de l’ Academie des Sciences,” 1748, pp. 345-386.
T “"Tbis,’1803. p: 361. t “Ibis,” 1893, p. 563.
§ Gadow, “ Dict. Birds,” p. 877. [| ** Ibis,” 1907, p. 614.
H. WORMALD: A SNIPE AND ITS HABITS. 255
‘bill, but this is not so surprising when one realises that
the last inch or so of the bill is a mass of nerves. Fig. 5
shows him toying with a worm held in front of him. He
feeds at intervals throughout the whole day and night,
and eats a large quantity of grit and small pebbles, which
Fig. 5,—Toying with a Worm.
(Photographed by P. H. Bahr.)
can be heard grinding in his gizzard quite distinctly
at a distance of several feet, especially immediately
after feeding; the gizzard grinds twelve times to the
minute. The digestion is wonderfully rapid, so much so
that I do not think a worm stays in the bird for more
than ten minutes. His hearing is very acute, and I have
seen him listen like a Thrush, then drive his bill into the
256 BRITISH BIRDS.
turf and bring out a worm, which is sucked down with
no apparent exertion, and the bird does not throw back
his head as one constantly sees depicted, but rather
stretches out his neck, the bill pointing downwards.
Fig. 6 shows him in the act of swallowing a worm. If
the worm is too large to be swallowed whole, it is hammered
and pinched until broken up, when the pieces are
swallowed separately. He will eat any kind of worm
except brandlings, and is very fond of the grubs of
Fic. 6.—In the act of Swallowing a Worm.
(Photographed by P. H. Bahr.)
daddy long-legs. While feeding he keeps up a perpetuan
twitter.
‘ John ”’ is not so large as a wild Snipe, nor is his bill
so long as it should be, and I put both these defects down
to his being hand-reared. He is exceedingly tame,
and will let me do anything with him (cf. Fig. 7). He
will even “‘ display ’ to me, walking round and round my
hand, uttering the spring note, with his tail spread out in
H. WORMALD: A SNIPE AND ITS HABITS. 257
a fan, gently poking my hand with his bill. Then he squats
down flat on the ground with his neck stretched out,
which makes me wonder whether “he” is not really a
female. Mr. Bahr’s photographs are the best proof
that could be given of his tameness to anyone
who has not seen him, for they were taken almost
on the window sill, the window being wide open, with
the camera held three feet from the bird, which did
not even flinch at the click of the shutter. Fig. 8
Fic. 7.—A Proof of his Tameness.
(Photographed by P. H. Bahr.)
depicts him looking out of the open window at a
passing Rook.
When at rest he almost invariably stands on one leg,
hopping about, and even feeding in this attitude, a habit
common with most waders. Constantly he will play by
himself, commencing by standing bolt upright and then
squatting down flat, with his tail raised and spread out
into a fan (the two outer tail-feathers not extended
beyond the others). Then he will suddenly take two or
three jumps to either side with wings closed. After
258 BRITISH BIRDS.
going through this performance perhaps _ half-a-dozen
times he strolls leisurely off.
As far as I can judge his eyesight is about equal during
day and night. I have been asked how weather affects
him, but this I am unable to answer, because he lives,
Fre. 8.—Looking at a passing Rook,
(Photographed by P. H. Bahr.)
as before stated, in my smoking-room, out of the reach
of weather.
It should be stated that “John” is in perfect health
and plumage. So many so-called tame birds are really
ill, which is the cause of their tameness, but I think the
illustrations show that my Snipe’s tameness is not caused
through ill-health.
( 259)
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS
AND THEIR WORKS.
SANG
Wee Bee LHINS:) M.A., La.Mi, > MB.0.U.
VI—THOMAS PENNANT (1726—1798).
ALTHOUGH the fame of Thomas Pennant both as a
naturalist and as an author, has suffered somewhat by
the lapse of time, he nevertheless must ever hold a some-
what prominent position amongst the British ornitholo-
gists of the past. This he would, perhaps, be entitled to
by reason of his being the author of the first important
history of British birds, which was illustrated with
coloured plates* (7.e., The British Zoology, London,
1766, one vol., folio). But this point, interesting as it is, is
quite overshadowed by the fact that it was owing to
Pennant’s undoubted position as the leading British
zoologist of his time that Gilbert White was led to address
to him, in the shape of letters, those notes and observations
which afterwards formed part of the immortal ‘“‘ Natural
History of Selborne.” The numerous zoological works
of Pennant had, moreover, a very marked effect on the
production of ornithological literature in Great Britain.
The period which had elapsed from the death of the
celebrated John Ray in 1705, till the publication of
Pennant’s “ British Zoology ”’ in 1766 is among the leanest
in the history of British ornithology, but the publication
of Pennant’s works seems to have given an impetus to
the production of such literature, and though many of
the books that followed his “‘ British Zoology,” in quick
succession, such as John Berkenhout’s ‘‘ Outlines of
the Natural History of Great Britain’ (London, 1769,
three vols., 8vo); William Hayes’ “ Natural History of
* The first book treating of British birds, illustrated with coloured
plates, would appear to be “A Natural History of English Song
Birds,” by Eleazar Albin, London, 1737, 1 vol., 8vo. é
260 BRITISH BIRDS.
British Birds ” (London, 1775, one vol., imp. folio) ; John
Walcott’s ““Synopsis of British Birds”? (London, 1789,
two vols., 4to); William Lewin’s “Birds of Great Britain ””
(London, 1789, seven vols., imp. 4to); Thomas Lord’s
“Entire New System of Ornithology, or Ccumenical
History of British Birds ” (London, 1791, 1 vol., folio);
Bolton’s *‘ Harmonia Ruralis’ (London, 1794, two vols.,
folio); and Edward Donovan’s “ Natural History of
British Birds ”? (London, 1794, ten vols., 8vo); were litile
more than compilations, and of no particular interest
save to the collector and bibliographer. Exception
must be made in favour of such valuable works as John
Legg’s *“‘ Discourse on the Emigration of British Birds ”
(one vol., 8vo), anonymously published at Salisbury in
1780, and afterwards erroneously attributed to George
Edwards ; Tunstall’s “‘ Ornithologia Britannica,’* which
also appeared anonymously in 1771 (London, one vol.,
folio); the well-known ‘“‘General Synopsis of Birds,” by
John Latham (London, 1781), which contained in the
second volume of its supplement “ A List of the Birds of
Great Britain,” and the still more famous ‘‘ History of
British Birds,” by Thomas Bewick, the first volume of
which appeared in 1797.
Thomas Pennant, the son of a country gentleman,
was born at Downing, in Flintshire, in the year 1726,
and was educated at Queen’s College, Oxford. Our
principal source of information for the particulars of
Pennant’s life is his own work :—
“The / Literary Life / of the late / Thomas Pennant,
Esq. / By Himself. / [Latin quotation] London: / Sold
by Benjamin & John White, Fleet-Street, / and Robert
Faulder, New Bond-Street. / MDCCXCIII.
1 vol., 4to, pp. 144 & IV. Plates.
From this quaint and somewhat self-laudatory work
we learn that Pennant having received as a present from
a kinsman, when twelve years old, a copy of the
* A similar but much rarer work by Charles Fothergill was published
at York in 1799.
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 261
“Ornithology of Francis Willughby,” early developed
a “‘ taste for that study, and incidentally a love for that
of natural history in general, which I have since pursued
with my constitutional ardor.’ Pennant began the first
of his many “ Tours,” his accounts of which from their
topographical interest are more read at the present day
than his other writings, from Oxford in 1747. His first
literary work, an extract from a letter written to his uncle,
James Mytton, concerning an earthquake at Downing
in 1750, appears in the 10th volume of the ‘“‘ Abridgement
of the Philosophical Transactions,’ and thenceforward
his active pen knew no rest until the time of his death,
when he was engaged on an ambitious work entitled
** Outlines of the Globe,” of which he had projected some
fifteen quarto volumes, only four of which would seem
to have been published. It is here only possible to deal
with a few of the zoological books of this prolific author,
but it may afford some idea of the vast output of his
writings if we mention that the number of plates engraved
for his several works totals no less than eight hundred
and two (cf. Literary Life, p. 38). In 1755 Pennant
commenced a correspondence with the great Linnzus,
and in 1757, as he tells us, received “ the first and greatest
of my Literary honors,” being elected “at the instance
of Linneus himself,” a member of the Royal Society of
Upsal. In 1761 Pennant began to publish his “‘ British
Zoology,” which, when completed in 1776, contained
one hundred and thirty-two coloured plates, engraved
by Peter Mazel, and coloured by Peter Pallou, ‘“ an
excellent artist, but too fond of giving gaudy colours to
his subjects.” This work which, as Pennant himself
observes, would have been more useful in quarto size,
he produced chiefly at his own expense, devoting the
proceeds to the “ benefit of the Welch Charity-School on
Clerkenwell Green” (cf. adv. to the second edition of
The British Zoology, 1768). The publication of the
first edition of the “ British Zoology ” had been delayed
by a journey, which Pennant made to the continent in
262 BRITISH BIRDS.
1765. In the course of his travels he visited Buffon
(1707-1787) at Paris, and informs us that “‘ the celebrated
naturalist was satisfied with my proficiency in natural
history, and publickly acknowledged his favourable
sentiments of my studies in the fifteenth volume of his
‘Histoire Naturelle.’ Unfortunately long before I had
any thoughts of enjoying the honour of his acquaintance
I had in my ‘ British Zoology ’ made a comparison between
the free-thinking philosopher and our great and religious
countryman, Mr. Ray, much to the advantage of the
lather 27.2.0 but such was his irritability, that in the
first volume of his ‘ Histoire Naturelle des Oiseaux,’ he
fell on me most unmercifully, but happily often without
reason.”’ From France, Pennant passed on to Germany
and Holland, and at The Hague met Pallas (1741-1811),
the famous traveller, ““a momentous affair, for it gave
rise to my ‘Synopsis of Quadrupeds,’ * and the second
edition, under the name of the * History of Quadrupeds,’ fT
a work received by the naturalists of different parts of
Europe in a manner uncommonly favourable.”
To return to the “ British Zoology,” the full title is
as follows :—
“The / British Zoology / Class I. Quadrupeds. /
II. Birds. / Published under the Inspection of the /
Cymmorodorion Society, / Instituted for the / Promoting
Useful Charities and the knowledge of / Nature among
the Descendants of the / Ancient Britons. / [lustrated
with / one hundred and seven Copper Plates. / London : /
Printed by J. & J. March, on the Tower Hill, for the
Society : / and sold for the Benefit of the British Charity
School on / Clerkenwell-Green. MDCCLXVI.
1 vol., imp. folio. Collation: pp. 14, un. -+ pp. 162 =
pp. 4, Index and list of “‘ Encouragers to this Under-
taking,” + CXXXII. Plates. (A fifth part containing
twenty-five plates was added to the one hundred and
seven enumerated in the above title, thus making one
_ * Chester, 1771, 1 vol., 8vo. + London, 1781, 2 vols., 4to.
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 263
hundred and thirty-two in all, viz., eleven of quadrupeds
and one hundred and twenty-one of birds.)
In 1768 appeared the second edition of the above. This
was published in two volumes by Benjamin White (brother
of Gilbert White, the naturalist), who paid Pennant £100
for the right of publication.
In 1770 an octavo volume was published of ninety-six
pages, “including a list of European Birds extra
Britannic,’ and CII. Plates. This must rank as the
third edition of the “ British Zoology ’’—it was incor-
porated in the fourth edition, published in 1776, four
volumes 4to and 8vo. This edition was printed at
Warrington for Benjamin White, and is sometimes found
with the plates coloured. A fifth edition, also in four
volumes, 4to and 8vo, appeared in 1812.
It may here be mentioned that the folio edition of the
‘“ British Zoology ”’ had been translated into German and
Latin by “‘M. de Murre, of Nurenbergh,” and published
in the same size as the original, hut the colouring of the
plates is an improvement on that in the English edition.
The summer of the year following the publication of
the ‘‘ British Zoology,” viz., August, 1767, saw the com-
mencement of the celebrated correspondence between
Gilbert White and Thomas Pennant; White’s share of
which (Pennant’s is lost) was afterwards published in
his “ Natural History of Selborne.” This correspondence
continued down to November, 1780, and consisted in all
of forty-four letters, the first actually addressed to Pennant
by White being numbered ten in the series, the preceding
nine being added for the sake of uniformity when White
published his book in 1789. The correspondence was
commenced by White, who was prompted to address
his observations to Pennant both on account of the latter’s
leading position as a naturalist, and also because “ of
your repeated mention of me in some late letters to my
brother ” (i.e., Benjamin White, Pennant’s publisher).
_ There does not seem to have been any great friendship
| between White and Pennant—Gilbert White appears to
264 BRITISH BIRDS.
have been hurt at Pennant’s making full use of the
material contained in White’s letters for his second and
subsequent editions of the “ British Zoology,” without
due acknowledgment ;* and Pennant makes no mention
of the Selborne naturalist in his “ Literary Life.”
‘* Little did he anticipate,” says Professor Bell, ....
“that his correspondent would be commemorated with
ever-increasing admiration and esteem, while his own
more pretentious book is only regarded of value because,
at the time of its publication, it filled a gap in British
Natural Science, and contained some matter of import-
ance, the best of which was really not his own.”
It was, however, probably to Pennant that White owed
his first introduction to Daines Barrington, his other
correspondent ; and to whom the remaining sixty-six
letters of the “‘ Natural History of Selborne”’ were
addressed. Writing to Pennant in 1768, White says,
‘““T have received from your friend Mr. Barrington one
of the naturalist’s journals, which I shall endeavour to
fill up in the course of the year.”
In 1766 Pennant made the acquaintance of another
very eminent man, Sir Joseph Banks (1743-1820), the
zoologist, and companion of Cook in his circumnavigation
of the globe. The commencement of Pennant’s friendship
with Sir Joseph Banks was signalised by a gift from the
latter of a copy of Turner’s “ Avium Historia,” a book
which even at that time was described as scarce. From
Sir Joseph Banks, Pennant received much kindness and
help, notably in the case of his “Arctic Zoology,”
published in 1785 (three volumes and supplement, 4to),
which, although mainly a compilation, proved to be
by far the most valuable of Pennant’s zoological works,
and which was translated into German, French, and
Swedish. Of Pennant’s contributions to natural history
there is but little to be said; they derived their great
* But such acknowledgment was rare at that time, and Pennant
does refer to the help he received from White, p. xiii., preface, and
p- 498, appendix to the 1768 edition of the “‘ British Zoology.”
(From
THOMAS PENNANT.
i265 1798.
the Engraving by J. Romney, after the Painting by
eee
T. Gainsborough.)
266 BRITISH BIRDS.
popularity partly from their very brief and formal
descriptions, and partly from the lack of standard works
available both at that time, and for many years to come.
The charm of Gilbert White had yet to be discovered,
and though the woodcuts of Thomas Bewick proved a
oreat incentive to the study of ornithology, it was not
until the genius of George Montagu produced in 1802
the ‘ Ornithological Dictionary” that the work which
had been begun by Willughby and Ray, was properly
continued. The very productiveness of Pennant’s work
no doubt also detracted from its utility—as he himself
tells us, “I am often astonished at the multiplicity of
my publications, especially when I reflect on the various
duties it has fallen to my lot to discharge, as a father of a
family, landlord of a small but very numerous tenantry,
and a not inactive magistrate.” * Towards the close of
Pennant’s active life he was confined to his ancestral
seat at Downing by an accident which broke the patella
of his knee, but he continued to work with unabated
energy at the revision of his “‘ Outlines of the Globe,”
but his health was rapidly failing, and he passed away
on December 16th, 1798, at the advanced age of
seventy-two.
* Besides the Zoological works already mentioned, Pennant wrote
*“Indian Zoology,’ 1769-179G; ‘‘Genera of Birds,’ Edinburgh, 1773,
and London, 1781; ‘‘ Indexes to the Ornithologie of the Comte de
Buffon,” 1786, while the observations on natural history contained
in the various Tours, notably in ‘‘ The Tour to Scotland,” 3 vols.,
1776, and that ‘‘in Wales,” 3 vols., 1810, are of considerable interest,
and this principally from the fact that they were jotted down without
any attempt at scientific treatment.
ON THE MORE IMPORTANT ADDITIONS TO OUR
KNOWLEDGE OF BRITISH BIRDS SINCE 1899.
BY
Hof: WITHBERBY snp NB TICHRURST.
Parr, XE
(Continued from page 229.)
COMMON SNIPE Gallinago celestis (Frenzel). S. page 573.
Weight.—Ninety shot in Shetland averaged 5.78 oz. Have
been killed up to 7? oz. (Ann. S.N.H., 1906, p. 53, and 1905,
DD: D0).
“ Sabine’s Snipe.”’—Some examples regarded as mutations
or discontinuous variations and not melanoid varieties (W.
P. Pycraft, I6vs, 1905; p. 289).
BROAD-BILLED SANDPIPER Limicola platyrhyncha
(Temm.). °S: page 577.
Kent.—An immature female was procured near Littlestone-
on-Sea, on August 3lst, 1901 (L. A. Curtis Edwards, Zool.,
1901, p. 390).
SussEx.—An immature female was shot at Rye on August
29th, 1904 (M. J. Nicoll, Bull. B.O.C., XV., p..12).
AMERICAN PECTORAL SANDPIPER Tringa maculata
Vieill. S. page 579.
SUFFOLK.—One was shot at Aldeburgh on September 13th,
1900 (EK. C. Arnold, Zool., 1900, p. 521). [A “ Pectoral Sand-
piper’ was reported in the “Field” to have been shot at
Southwold on September 2nd, 1904 (J. H. Gurney, f.c., 1905,
p- 96).]
CoRNWALL.—Two have been obtained on the mainland of
the county, the last at Porthgwarra on April 30th, 1906 (J.
Clark, i.c., 1907, p. 286).
Scitty Istes.—Ten are recorded in place of four mentioned
in the ‘“ Manual.” The last was shot by Captain Dorrien-
Smith in September, 1891 (J. Clark and F. R. Rodd, t.c., 1906,
p. 339).
TRELAND.—A young bird in full autumn plumage was shot
at Belmullet, co. Mayo, early in October, 1900 (H. Saunders,
Bull.B.O.C., XT1., p. 34), and another was shot near the same place
in September, 1900 (R. J. Ussher, List of Irish Birds, p. 44).
268 BRITISH BIRDS.
CHANNEL IsLANDS.—J/ersey.—One in Mr. Romeril’s collection
was shot from a party of four about thirty years ago (A. Mackay,
Zool., 1904, p. 379).
AMERICAN STINT Tringa minutilla Vieill. 8S. page 587.
CoRNWALL.—One “ was killed bya fisherman near Mousehole
in September, 1890, and was bought in the flesh by W. E.
Baily, of Paull, in whose collection the writer saw it in Feb-
ruary, 1902, incorrectly labelled ‘ Tringa minuta’”’ (J. Clark,
Zool., 1907, p. 286).
CURLEW-SANDPIPER Tinga subarquata (Gild.).
S. page 591.
Nestine.—Found nesting numerously in June, 1901, by the
late Dr. H. Walter in the Taimyr Peninsula (H. E. Dresser,
Ibis, 1904, p. 231).
KNOT Tringa canutus L. 8S. page 595.
Nestinc.—Found nesting in June, 1901, by the late Dr. H.
Walter in the Taimyr Peninsula. The eggs vary greatly in form,
size, and coloration; the nests—depressions lined with a few
dry grass-bents and white tangle—were placed in grassy places
on the Tundra; the incubating male (or female) did not leave
the nest until almost trodden on, when it puffed out its
feathers until it appeared almost double its normal size ;
the male was most careful of the young, but the female appeared
as an uninterested spectator (H. E. Dresser, /bis, 1904, p. 232).
A clutch of eggs was taken in Hrisey, in the north of Iceland,
on June 17th, 1898, and the bird belonging to it is stated to
have been watched at a few yards’ distance by a competent
observer—E. Moller, a collector in Iceland, now dead (Otto
Ottosson, f.c., 1905, p. 105).
DiIsTRIBUTION.—7". canutus is an irregular visitor to India
on migration as well as 7’. crassirostris (F. Finn, t.c., p. 351).
Dr. V. Bianchi has informed us that 7’. canutus is common on
the Yenesei and Lena Rivers.
RUFF Machetes pugnax (L.). 8. page 599.
DurHAM.—Nested in 1901, 2 and 3 near the mouth
of the Tees, and not on the Yorkshire side as stated antea Vol. I.,
p. 68 (T. H. Nelson, /bis, 1906, p. 735 and in litt.).
HeEBRIDES.—Six records for the Outer Hebrides are detailed
(J. A. Harvie-Brown, Ann. S.N.H., 1903, p. 13). South Harris.
—A male, autumn, 1906 (Field, 29, rx., 06, p. 580). Coll.—
One about September 16th, 1905 (t.c., 1906, p. 201).
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 269
IRELAND.—For a detailed account of the various occurrences
cf. C. J. Patten, “ Irish Nat.,” 1900, p. 187.
BUFF-BREASTED SANDPIPER Tringites rufescens (Vieill.).
S. page 601.
NorFrotk.—An immature male was shot near Wells, on
September 7th, 1899 (KE. C. Arnold, Zool., 1899, p. 475).
BARTRAMW’S SANDPIPER Bartramia longicauda (Bechst.).
S. page 603.
CoRNWALL.—One was found hanging in a poulterer’s shop
at Falmouth in October, 1903, by Dr. Owen (J. Clark, Zool.,
1907, p. 286).
SPOTTED SANDPIPER Totanus macularius (I..).
S. page 605.*
Kent.—A pair were shot on May 5th, 1904, in a ditch between
Lydd and Brookland, in Romney Marsh (J. L. Bonhote, Bull.
BOC:, SEV :p. 84):
WOOD-SANDPIPER Totanus glareola (J. F. Gm.).
S. page 607.
TRELAND.—One was obtained on August 26th, 1899, by Mr.
J. F. Knox, on the Black Strand, Trancore, co. Waterford
(EK. Williams, Jrish Nat., 1899, p. 231). One was shot on
August 19th, 1901, near Sutton, co. Dublin (W. J. Williams,
men, 1901.) p. 205).
ORKNEY.—One was shot on Eday on September Ist, 1902
(C. S. Buxton, Zool., 1902, p. 391).
GREEN SANDPIPER Totanus ochropus (L.). S. page 609.
ScoTLAND.—South Uist—One was obtained in the autumn
of 1901, and was the first recorded for the Outer Hebrides
(J. MacRury, Ann. S.N.H., 1902, p.55). Fair Isle (Shetlands.)
—One or two (the first for the Shetlands or Orkneys) were
seen in early September, 1905 and 1906 (W. E. Clarke, t.c.,
1906, p. 76, and 1907, p. 79).
IRELAND.—A solitary bird was shot at Foxford, co. Mayo,
on June 30th, 1903 (G. Knox, Jrish Nat., 1903, p. 248), and
another at Malahide, co. Dublin, on April 28th, 1906. The
species is chiefly known in Ireland as a casual autumn and
winter visitor (R. J. Ussher, List of Irish Birds, p. 46).
SOLITARY SANDPIPER. Totanus solitarius (Wilson).
S. page 611.
SussEx.—One was shot at Rye Harbour on August 7th,
1904 (C. B. Ticehurst, Bull. B.O.C., XV., p. 12).
270 BRITISH BIRDS.
Nestinc.—The eggs were first taken in 1903, and again
in 1904 in Northern Alberta by Mr. Evan Thompson. —
They are described as being like those of the Green Sandpiper,
but considerably smaller, and like that bird, this species lays
in the old nests of other birds. One set of eggs was found on
June 16th, 1903, in the old nest of an American Robin, some
fifteen feet from the ground ; another on June 9th, 1904, in a
Bronzed Grackle’s nest, in a similar position, and another on
June 24th, 1904, in the old nest of a Cedar-Waxwing (ef.
F. C.. R. Jourdain, Jéis, 1905, p. 158, and “1907, p. aby,
Pl. XI, Wigs 4,4).
SPOTTED .REDSHANK Totanus fuscus (L.).
S. page 617.
ScoTLaAND.—LHast Renfrewshire-—One was seen in October,
1898, and a pair in September, 1899 (Ann. S.N.H., 1899,
p- 51, 1900; p. 51). Dumfriesshire.-—One was shot on Feb-
ruary 13th, 1899, on the Solway (t.c., 1899, p. 112). One was
seen in October, 1903, at Carsethorn (t.c., 1904, p. 216).
NortaH WateEs.—Very rare, only occurred three or four
times—the last on the Dovey Estuary in September, 1899
(H. KE. Forrest, Vert. F. N. Wales, p. 362).
Nestina.—Nests found by the late 8. A. Davies and Mr. J.
Stares on the River Muonio (Lapland) were always in the
marshes (bis, 1905, p. 84). :
RED-BREASTED SNIPE Macrorhamphus griseus (J. F..Gm.).
S. page 621.
YORKSHIRE.—One shot in September, 1864, on Norland
Moor has been examined by Messrs. Eagle Clarke and Nelson
(B. of Yorks., p. 638).
HaAmpsHIRE.—Iwo, said to have been got in the county,
are in Mr. Hart’s collection, one being dated September, 1872,
and the other October, 1902 (J. E. Kelsall and P. W. Munn,
B. of Hanis., p. 320).
BLACK-TAILED GODWIT Limosa belgica (J. F. Gm.).
S. page 625.
ScoTLanp.—Outer Hebrides —Two have apparently been
obtained (cf. J. A. Harvie-Brown, Ann. S.N.H., 1903, p. 14).
Lanarkshire.—Three were identified near Lenzie on May 4th,
1907 (J. Paterson, f.c., 1907, p. 184).
COMMON CURLEW Numenius arquata (L.). 8S. page 627.
SurREy.—A nest was found and two eggs taken on Chob-
ham Common in 1897 (H. Saunders, Bull. B.O.C., XI., p. 34).
(To be continued.)
( OTres)
THE GREENLAND WHEATEAR SAXICOLA
GNANTHE LHUCORRHOA (GMELIN).
BY
Cr Be LVICHHURST, M.A... M.Re8., M.B.O.U..
IT is curious that so little attention should have been
paid to this bird of late years, and that its migrations
through Great Britain should be so little known. Gould,
in his *‘ Birds of Great Britain,’’ seems to have noted the
occurrence of this large Wheatear, but it was not until
1879 that Lord Clifton (now the Earl of Darnley) pointed
out that this race did not arrive on the Kent and Sussex
shores till May and, besides being larger, differed from
the small race in having a deeper reddish buff throat
and breast; further, he did not know of its occurrence
west of Sussex (Lb7s, 1879, pp. 256-7).
As far as I have been able to ascertain no one, since
Lord Clifton wrote on the subject, has described its range
in Great Britain. JI have examined 460 Wheatears or
Wheatears’ wings, obtained in various parts of Great
Britain, and in many other parts of the world, and I[ think
that it can be said with certainty that the Greenland
Wheatear passes through the whole of Great Britain on
migration, for I have seen specimens of it from Yorkshire,
Suffolk, Norfolk, Kent, Sussex, Hants, Middlesex, Corn-
wall, Scilly Isles, Channel Isles, Pembrokeshire, co.
Wexford, and Shetland, whilst Mr. Barrington (Migration
of Birds at Irish Lnghts) records Wheatears with large
wings from cos. Cork, Donegal, Antrim, Dublin, and
Wicklow, which evidently belong to this race.
It usually arrives in the south of England during the
last week in April, and the first week in May, and
continues passing through till the end of that month ;
a few early ones may sometimes be seen migrating with
the small race in the second and third weeks of April,
and the earliest record I have is April 15th. The return
journey takes place usually during the latter half of
September, though a few examples are recorded during
272 “BRITISH BIRDS.
the last week in August, and the first part of September ;
they continue to pass during October, and the latest date
of which I have a record is October 31st.
Of the distribution of this Wheatear outside Great
Britain more is known, for Herr Stejneger, in reviewing
the whole subject (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus., Vol. XXIIL.,
No. 1220) states that it migrates via France, Great Britain,
Shetlands, and Faroe Islands, to Greenland and the
opposite portions of North America, as well as to Iceland,
where it is the breeding species, whilst the western part
of North America is inhabited by the small (typical)
race, which reaches these parts via the Asiatic continent.
Exactly where the Greenland Wheatear passes the
winter is not yet completely known. Hitherto it has been
supposed to have been more or less confined to the
western part of North Africa, Senegal (where probably
the original type specimen was obtained), and Gambia
districts, but I have seen undoubted specimens from
Khartoum, Nubia, and Fashoda; so that, although the
majority may winter in West Africa, some at least spread
as far east as the Nile Valley. It apparently passes
through the Azores on migration.
The first Wheatears arrive in Greenland, according
to Herr Winge (Groenland’s Fuglefauna) about the end
of the first week of May; in early years it may be seen
in the first few days of May, in late years not till the third
week. The return migration lasts from mid-August
to mid-September, and few are seen by the end of that
month ; it has frequently been met with flying over the
open sea south-west of Iceland. Whether this race breeds
in the Faroe Islands or not must, I think, at present
remain doubtful.
Taking into consideration the difference in coloration
and size, migration, and breeding area, I have not the
slightest hesitation in agreeing with Lord Clifton and
Herr Stejneger as to the distinctness of the Greenland
race. The following diagrams give the results of my
measurements of 450 Wheatears’ wings :—
Number measured.
Number measured.
C. B. TICEHURST: GREENLAND WHEATEAR. 2738
Length of Wings of Males in millimétres.
[a8 [69 20] 91 [oz] 939 [95 | 96 | 07 | 98] 99 [100] 101 [102 [103] 104 | 105 [106 107 | 108]
Li) 2 a SD a
es 182 males of Saxicola enanthe enanthe.
— — 61 males of Sazicola enanthe leucorrhoa.
Length of Wings of Females in millimétres.
—— 137 females of Saxicola enanthe cnanthe.
— — 34 females of Saxicola enanthe leucorrhoa.
It will be seen that there is some slight overlapping
in measurements, but I find that this does not amount
to more than 2 per cent. of individuals—which agrees
exactly with Herr Stejneger’s results. Herr Winge states
that no Wheatears from Greenland which he has examined
measure less than 100 mm. in the wing, with which state-
ment I can quite agree (the two or three females of 99
mm. which [ measured probably being rather worn
specimens) ; moreover, I have not been able to find any
Wheatears shot outside the range of the Greenland
Wheatear which do not conform in mane measurement
to the small race.
All these birds were measured by myself, and only those
with which full data were recorded have been utilised.
THE JUBILEE OF THE BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS’
UNION.
THE meeting to celebrate the Jubilee of the foundation of the
B.O.U. in 1858 was held at 3, Hanover Square, on December
9th, 1908. Dr. F. Du Cane Godman, the President, was in
the chair, and the proceedings commenced by the reading
of a number of congratulatory messages from other
Ornithologists’ Unions. Dr. Godman then gave a_ short
address, which showed how intimate had been the relation
between the progress of ornithology and the progress of
the B.O.U. Dr. P. L. Sclater gave a history of the Union,
its journal, the “ Ibis,” of which he has for so many years
been editor, and its founders, chief amongst whom was the
much-lamented Alfred Newton. Mr. A. H. Evans spoke
very briefly of the life and work of some of the founders.
Mr. Henry Upcher, as the earliest (surviving) elected member
(1864), then took the chair, and presented on the _ behalf
of the members of the Union, a gold medal to each of the four
(surviving) founders, viz., Dr. F. Du Cane Godman, Dr. P. L.
Sclater, Mr. Percy Godman, and Mr. W. H. Hudleston. The
medal bears on the obverse the well-known figure of the Ibis,
on the reverse the name of the recipient.
A facsimile of the original list of the twenty founders,
written by Newton and corrected by Dr. Sclater in 1859, was
handed round. Amongst the names famous in ornithology,
besides those already mentioned, may be noted Lieut.-Col.
H. M. Drummond (first President), T. C. Eyton, J. H. Gurney
(Senr.), Hon. T. Lyttleton Powys (afterwards Lord Lilford),
Osbert Salvin, Rev. (afterwards Canon) H. B. Tristram, and
John Wolley.
In the evening a largely attended commemorative dinner
was held.
A special volume of the “ Ibis ” commemorating the Jubilee
and containing a history of the Union, with lives of the
founders and principal members, together with portraits,
will be published shortly.
THE BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS’ UNION AND. RARE
BREEDING BIRDS.
At the annual meeting of the British Ornithologists’ Union,
held in May last, H. F. Witherby proposed a new rule, the
NOTES. 275
effect of which was to exclude from the Union any member
who took or connived at the taking of any bird or egg of
certain species which were extremely rare as breeding birds in
the British Isles. The proposer explained that his rule was
founded on purely scientific grounds, his opinion being that
it was unscientific, and, therefore, directly contrary to the
interests of the premier Ornithologists’ Union of the world,
to exterminate or risk the extermination of any bird in any
particular portion of its breeding area, and so alter its natural |
geographical distribution. The details of the rule were much
criticized, and it was generally thought to be too drastic in
character, although the majority at a largely attended meeting
were without doubt in favour of the “ spirit’ of the proposed
rule. It was decided to refer the matter to the Committee
for consideration.
At a Special General Meeting of the Union held on De-
cember 10th Dr. F. Du Cane Godman, the President, being in
the chair, the Commitee communicated their report, and
submitted a new rule for the consideration of the members.
The proposal to adopt the new rule was seconded by H. F.
Witherby, who withdrew his proposed rule. Amendments moved
by the Hon. Walter Rothschild and Dr. J. Wiglesworth were
carried, and amongst others who took part in an exhaustive
discussion were the following :—Messrs. R. M. Barrington,
W. Bickerton, P. F. Bunyard, W. Eagle Clarke, Dr. F. D.
Drewitt, Messrs. J. Gerrard, N. Gilroy, A. F. Griffith, Dr. E.
Hartert, Sir T. Digby Pigott, Mr. A. Trevor-Battye, Lt.-Col.
R. G. Wardlaw-Ramsay, and the Honorary Secretary, Mr. J. L.
Bonhote. The rule as amended was then put to the meeting
and was carried unanimously. The new rule will require con-
firmation at the next annual meeting of the Union. As finally
amended it reads as follows :—
“If, in the opinion of the Committee, any member shall have:
acted in a manner injurious to the interests of or good name of
the Union, or shall have personally assisted in, or connived at,,
the capture or destruction of any bird, nest or eggs in the British
Isles, by purchase or otherwise, likely, in the opinion of the-
‘Committee, to lead to the extermination or serious diminution
of that species as a British bird, the Secretary shall be
directed to send a registered letter to the member, stating
the facts brought before the Committee, and asking for an
explanation of the same, but without mentioning the source
from which such information was obtained. After allowing
a reasonable time (not less than a clear fortnight after the
receipt of the Secretary’s letter) for reply, or for appearing in
person before the Committee if he so desire, the Committee,
provided that not less than four are agreed, shall have
power to remove that gentleman’s name from the List of
276 | BRITISH BIRDS.
Members without assigning any reason. Such member may,
if he so desire, stand for re-election by ballot at the next
Annual Meeting, and in the event of his re-election, no fee
for re-admission shall be required.”’
The action of the British Ornithologists’ Union in condemn-
ing in such unhesitating fashion the practice of collecting the
birds and eggs of rare British breeding species will be received
with the most intense satisfaction by all who have the science
of Ornithology at heart.—Ebs.
IRISH BIRDS.
In noticing Mr. Ussher’s “ List of Irish Birds” in the last
number of this Magazine, I much regret to have done an
injustice to Irish ornithologists—quite unintentionally—by
stating that little information had been added since the
publication of Messrs. Ussher and Warren’s “ Birds of
Treland.” I fully intended to add, “ which had not already
been referred to in these pages.” Mr. Ussher has very kindly
supplied me with particulars of the information additional
to that in the ‘“ Birds of Ireland” contained in his ‘ List,”
and I am glad to be able to draw attention to the following
records which have not already been mentioned in BritisH
BrrpDs :—
WateEr-Prrit.—A specimen shot by the late Canon Tristram
on Rockabill, co. Dublin, in June, 1861, has hitherto been
unrecorded. This, the first and only Irish specimen, is now
in the Dublin Museum.
Honey-Buzzarp.—One was shot in King’s County, on
September 28th, 1903.
AMERICAN BitTERN.—Has now occurred fifteen times,
as against eleven given in the “ Birds of Ireland.”
SPOONBILL.—Has occurred in thirty-five instances, while
only thirty-three were mentioned in the “ Birds of Ireland.”
CRANE.—In the “Catacombs” cave at Edenvale, co.
Clare, several bones of Crane have been discovered.
There is also additional information with regard to some of
the Terns and Shearwaters and other birds which will be noticed
in the articles on “ Additions.” Mr. Ussher also points out
that in the case of the Rose-coloured Starling he made a slip
in stating that only about twenty had been recorded—the
number should have been twenty-eight. H.F.W.
RARE BIRDS IN IRELAND.
Buack Repstart (Ruticilla titys).
One was shot near Mountrath, Queen’s co., on November
4th, 1908.
NOTES. 277
Honety-Buzzarp (Pernis apivorus).
An immature male was shot near Ardee, co. Louth, on
October 13th, 1908, and, being only winged, was forwarded
by its captor to the Dublin Zoological Gardens where, however,
it died within a week of its arrival.
OspREY (Pandion haliactus).
On November Ist, 1908, a bird in immature plumage flew
on board a fishing-boat coming to Wexford, and was captured,
but died soon after reaching the shore. I examined the bird
and found it thin, although the plumage was in good order.
BuFFON’S SKUA (Stercorarius parasiticus).
A bird in first year’s plumage was shot in a wood bordering
Lough Neagh, co. Antrim, on November 18th, 1908.
GREAT NORTHERN DIVER IN SUMMER PLUMAGE IN OCTOBER.
A very large specimen of Colymbus glacialis in full summer
plumage was shot on the River Moy, co. Sligo, on October
31st, 1908. The bird showed no trace whatever of winter
plumage, and was in fact in better plumage than birds I have
examined in the month of May. W. J. WILLIAMS.
ALBINISTIC VARIETY OF THE REDWING.
Earzty in November we received from Filey, Yorkshire, an
albinistic variety of the Redwing. This bird was pale cream-
coloured all over, the bases of the feathers being, however,
grey. Its beak was yellowish, and the legs and feet were very
pale brown. We sent it to Mr. Eagle Clarke, who identified
it as Turdus iliacus, and we have presented the bird to the
Royal Scottish Museum.
Evetyn V. BAxtTER AND LEONORA JEFFREY RINTOUL.
THE NORTHERN MARSH-TITMOUSE IN ENGLAND.
A NEW BRITISH BIRD.
An undoubted example of the Northern Marsh-Tit (Parus
borealis De Selys) was shot at Tetbury, Gloucestershire, in
March, 1907, by Mr. J. H. Paddock, who presented it to the
British Museum. I had the pleasure of exhibiting this bird
at the meeting of the British Ornithologists’ Club held on
November 18th, 1908 (cf. Bull. B.O.C., XXIII., p. 34). In
January, 1908, I observed a small lot of four or five Marsh-
Tits, undoubtedly of this species, at Welwyn, Herts. My
attention was first attracted by their Linnet-like song, com-
posed of a number of broken ascending notes, entirely different
to the call of the common Marsh-Tit. I watched the birds
at very close range, and had no doubt in my own mind that,
they were Scandinavian Marsh-Tits, the white sides of the
%
278 BRITISH BIRDS.
face and the pale upper-parts being very conspicuous. Iwas,
however, unable to procure a specimen; and, although I wrote
to Mr. H. F. Witherby, describing my experience, I did not
venture to place my observations on record until receiving
this undoubted example of P. borealis from Mr. Paddock. Itis
difficult to account for the appearance of this North-west
European Titmouse in Great Britain, for, so far as is at present
known, it is not a migratory species. It must now, however,
be added to the list of our accidental visitors.
7 W. R. OGILviz-GRANT.
THE FIRST BRITISH EXAMPLE OF THE
RED-THROATED PIPIT.
THE first recorded “ British’? example of the Red-throated
Pipit (Anthus cervinus) is said to have been obtained near
Brighton on March 13th, 1884.* This example went into the
‘Monk ”’ Collection, and finally passed into the Booth Museum
at Brighton.
A few months ago I had the opportunity of examining the
specimen in question, and I have no hesitation in saying that
it is not a Red-throated Pipit at all, but merely a brightly-
coloured example of the Meadow-Pipit (Anthus pratensis).
During the spring (March and April) large flocks of Meadow-
Pipits arrive on the coast of Sussex, and all the males of these
immigrants are very brightly coloured—in some the coloration
of the throat and upper breast is almost as red as in some
examples of Anthus cervinus—and it is undoubtedly owing
to this fact that the bird in question has been wrongly
identified.
If we exclude the Red-throated Pipit which was formerly
in the collection of the late Mr. Bond, labelled “‘ Unst, May
4th, 1854” (Saunders’ Manual, p. 135), the first British
example is either the bird obtained by Mr. Prentis at Rainham,
Kent, in April, 1880, or the undoubted example of A. cervinus
shot near St. Leonards, Sussex, on November 13th, 1895
(cf. Zool., 1896, p. 101).
The Red-throated Pipit may be readily identified at all
stages of plumage—except, perhaps, that of the nestling—
by the clear black marking to the centre of the feathers of the
rump and upper tail-coverts. The dark streaks on the
longest pair of under tail-coverts are not a reliable feature,
as these markings are frequently absent in Anthus cervinus
and often present in Anthus pratensis.
While on the subject of Pipits, I should like to point out
* Borrer, “Birds of Sussex,” p. 101; and Saunders, “* Manual,”
p. 135, 2nd ed.
NOTES. 279
that ail the examples of red-breasted Rock-Pipits in Case 16
in the Booth Museum are “Scandinavian” Rock-Pipits
(Anthus rupestris Nilss.); none of them are Water-Pipits
(Anthus spipoletta), as has been formerly suggested.
M. J. NICOLL.
During the past summer I paid a visit to the Rochester
Museum,which contains the admirable and excellently-cared for
collection of the late Mr. Walter Prentis, of Rainham, and at
Mr. Nicoll’s request carefully examined the bird to which he
refers in the above letter. With much regret I came to the
same conclusion with regard to it, as he has done with regard
to the Sussex specimen : it is undoubtedly nothing more than
an unusually bright Meadow-Pipit (A. pratensis). The breast
is pinkish-yellow, notred, and the rump and upper tail-coverts
are entirely devoid of the large black centres to the feathers,
which are such a characteristic feature of A. cervinus.
N. F. TicEHurst.
RICHARD’S PIPIT IN NORFOLK.
Tus bird is a not infrequent autumn visitor to Norfolk,
but it is worthy of record that a female was obtained at Cley
on October 3lst, and another on November 18th last, as I
am informed by Mr. H. N. Pashley. H. F. WITHERBY.
SOME SUSSEX RAVENS.
I am indebted to Mr. Walter Hewett, who was then game-
keeper to the lessees of Heathfield Park, for the following
interesting account of the nesting-places of the Raven on that
picturesque estate during the seventies of last centary. There
were two nesting sites used alternately by a pair of Ravens
in the park itself ; the one in a clump of old Scotch firs on the
Tower plain, the other in the Gravel Pit clump, also ancient
Scotch firs. This pair of Ravens were so destructive to
lambs and ewes during the lambing season—at times destroy-
ing the mother, during parturition—that deadly war was
waged against them. The old Ravens were so wary that it
was difficult to shoot them, but when the young were nearly
ready to fly the nest was riddled with bullets, and the brood
destroyed annually. In 1876 the Ravens deserted Heathfield
Park and built their nest a mile or so away, in a group of
Scotch firs, called the Mare and Foal, a very prominent object
in the landscape, situated on the ridge that runs from Pun-
nett’s Town, overlooking Cade Street. In April, 1876, Hewett
took up his position in Slaughter Lane, on the south side of
the Mare and Foal clump, sending a companion to the nest
to disturb the birds. The male Raven fell to Hewett’s gun,
280 BRITISH BIRDS.
but, being only winged, recovered, and lived for many years
in the Devonshire Park, Eastbourne. The next day, taking
advantage of a fog, Hewett shot the female from her nest.
This closes the history of the Heathfield Park Ravens,
doubtless descendants of those that feasted on the bodies
of Cade and his followers who perished near the same spot—
** Leaving thy trunk forcrows tofeed upon.” —Henry VI., ActIV.
H. W. FEILDEN.
LITTLE OWL IN NORTH-WEST OXFORDSHIRE.
A parr of Little Owls established themselves at Kingham,
Chipping Norton, last spring, and continued with us all the
summer, attracting much attention by their loud cries, uttered
repeatedly while hunting after sunset and during the early
part of the night. I may mention that I have had great
difficulty in finding a good description of this cry in English
ornithological works ; but in Fatio’s “ Oiseaux de la Suisse ”
I have at last found an excellent one. Professor Fatio is
gifted with a very keen ear for the utterances of birds, and has
had the experience of a long life among them. He writes
(Vol. I., p. 194): “Son cri, souvent répété, et qui passe
volontiers pour un mauvais présage, peut etre traduit de
diverses manieres, selon les circonstances et les appréciations ;
e’est souvent: kwitt ou kuwitt, parfois kuick ou kouuk, ou
keuw-keuw ou encore powpou-poupou.’ The second of these
descriptions agrees almost exactly with the way in which I
attempted to syllable the cry myself last summer.
No doubt the birds bred here, but we thought it advisable to
refrain from making an elaborate search. As we are on the
borders of Gloucestershire, I think their appearance here
marks the farthest point to the west that the birds have as
yet reached. W. WARDE FOWLER.
[In western counties the Little Owl has previously been
reported from Goring and Henley, in Oxfordshire (B. B.,
Vol. I., p. 338), Fairford, Willey, and Shrewsbury, in Shropshire
(Vol. I., pp. 388 and 339), Avebury, in Wiltshire (Vol. IL.,
p. 100), and Sutton Coldfield, in Warwickshire (Vol. II., p.
240).—H.F.W.] 7
SCAUP-DUCKS IN NOTTINGHAMSHIRE IN THE
SPRING AND SUMMER OF 1908.
On March 21st, when fishing in the large lake in Thoresby
Park (this piece of water is over ninety ‘acres, and is situated
in the middle of a 2000 acre deer park) I saw one male and
three female Scaups. I had my binoculars, and got pretty
near to them in the boat. On May 2nd Mr. H. E. Forrest and I
NOTES. 281
saw three, and on August 14th the Rev. B. D. Aplin and I saw
two females. Of course I cannot say if they nested, but I
may mention that the lake is full of pike, and very few ducks
rear many young ones. On all three dates I also saw a pair of
Pochards, and one solitary male Goosander. Even the female
Scaup, when once known, cannot be mistaken. It is much
coarser about the head and bill than the Tufted, and shows
the white, or pale yellow, face very distinctly. J. WHITAKER.
AMPUTATION OF LAPWING’S TOES BY MEANS OF
WOOL.
A FRIEND of mine shot a Lapwing (in good condition) on
September 28th in Wigtownshire, N.B., which, when we picked
it up, was found to have the following condition of its feet :—
Right foot—Amputation of inner two digits at the metatarso-
phalangeal joints. Left foot—Amputation of internal digit
at metatarso-phalangeal joints, and a tight constriction,
caused by sheep’s wool, round the tarsus, just distal to the
- “4 ,/
ribUre emf /
seller, ea
A ae 4
<a eee
etn he 3 : :
hallux, the wool cutting deeply into the tarsus, especially
on the outer side, and causing an everted edge to the furrow,
similar to that observed on the remaining proximal end of
the right foot. I am indebted to Mr. P. H. Bahr for kindly
drawing the condition for me. Henry 8B. Evron.
[A series of legs of the Lapwing affected in the same way
as described above was shown by Dr. C. B. Ticehurst at the
meeting of the British Ornithologists’ Club held on October
19th, 1904 (cf. Bull. B.O.C., XV., p. 12). These specimens
were from birds shot on Romney Marsh, and of eight Lapwings
shot, four were thus affected. A similar case is recorded of a
bird shot in co. Armagh (cf. A. R. Nichols, Irish Nat., 1905,
p-. 32).—H. F. W.j
282 BRITISH BIRDS.
BLACK-NECKED GREBES IN NORTH LANCASHIRE.
THE occurrence of the Black-necked or Eared Grebe (Podiceps
migricollis) in north Lancashire is, I venture to think, worthy
of note, especially so of three specimens. The first, an adult
in full summer plumage, I mentioned in the“ Zoologist ”
of September, 1904, as having been captured alive on a pond
at Middleton, near Morecambe, on July 28th, 1904. The
second was shot on October 24th of the same year on the tidal
part of the Lune below Lancaster, at Snatchems, and was an
adult in full winter plumage, whilst the third, an immature
bird, was shot in the same place as the last specimen in
February, 1907. All the three specimens occurred within a
couple of miles of one another. H. W. Rosryson.
LEACH’S FORK-TAILED PETRELS IN CUMBERLAND
AND LANCASHIRE.
Durine the week between November 18th and 25th the coasts
of north Lancashire and Cumberland were visited by numbers
of Fork-tailed Petrels (Procellaria leucorrhoa). The week
was a very stormy one, and the birds were probably blown
inshore by heavy winds, some being found some distance
inland. They were specially numerous off the slag-tip at
Carnforth, near Lancaster, on the 23rd and 24th, and occurred
all the way up the coast, and inland as far north as Carlisle,
and into the West Riding of Yorkshire. From the dates of
their capture it would seem that they were travelling down
the coastline from north to south. H. W. RosBinson.
It BULWER’S PETREL IN SUSSEX.
A MALE example of Bulwer’s Petrel (Bulweria bulweri) was
picked up much exhausted, but still alive, at Cliff End, near
Winchelsea, Sussex, on September 4th, 1908, after strong
south-westerly gales. The bird was taken to Mr. Bristow,
of St. Leonards, for preservation, and was there seen
in the flesh by Mr. W. R. Butterfield. It was eventually
purchased by Mr. C. J. Carroll, by whose courtesy we
have been allowed to photograph the stuffed bird. It
was exhibited on Mr. Carroll’s behalf by Mr. W. R. Ogilvie-
Grant at the meeting of the British Ornithologists’ Club held
on November 18th, 1908. There have only been three
previous occurrences of Bulwevr’s Petrel in the British Isles,
and of these two have also been in Sussex. A Yorkshire
example is quoted in Howard Saunders’ “ Manual” (2nd ed.,
p. 749), and on February 38rd, 1903, one was found dead at
Beachy Head, while on February 4th, 1904, another was
picked up dead at St. Leonards (Bull. B.O.C:, XIII., p. 51,
NOTES. 283
and XIV., p. 49). This Petrel breeds on the islands of the
Madeira and Canary groups, and is also found in the middle
Bulwer’s Petrel, picked up near Winchelsea, Sussex, on
September 4th, 1908,
of the Pacific in the Hawaiian group, as well as in the Bonin
and Volcano Islands far to the south-east of Japan. H.F.W.
ee eee
WRYNECKS IN NortH LANCASHIRE.—An example of Iynx
torqulla was captured alive on September 3rd, and anoth r
on October 2nd, 1908, near Lancaster. At one time wne
Wryneck seems to have nested in Lancashire, but it now rarely
visits the county (H. W. Robinson, Zool., 1908, p. 428).
Honey-Buzzarp IN ENGLAND.—The Rev. F. L. Blathwayt
records that two were shot near Grantham and one near
Lincoln between September 24th and October 5th, 1908
(Zool., 1908, p. 428). On September 26th an immature bird
was shot near Oldham (F. Stubbs, Nat., 1908, p. 456). One
was shot near Beccles and another near Great Yarmouth (? in
September), (B. Dye, Zool,, 1908, p. 468).
LINCOLNSHIRE AND SOMERSETSHIRE HERONRIES.—The Rev.
F. L. Blathwayt ‘gives some interesting particulars of these
(Zool., 1908, p. 450).
NESTING OF THE ScAup-Duck In Scottanp.—Correction.—
The nest found by Captain (now Colonel) R. Sandeman and
Mr. Heatley Noble was in Sutherlandshire, as mentioned on
page 85 (supra), and not in Speyside, as stated by Mr. P. H.
Bahr on page 211.
(1 Te]
FA i - mm
iiiifee =\\inip |
he oe
Qe) 886i rie bd x
F 54) : ; ——
Bird-Hunting through Wild Europe. By R. B. Lodge.
Illustrated. R. Culley. 7s. 6d. net.
In this book Mr. R. B. Lodge, who will be well-known to
most of our readers as a successful bird-photographer, describes
his recent experiences in Spain and the Balkans.
In Albania and Montenegro especially the author had to
undertake much travelling in a decidedly difficult country
before he was able to find the birds he was particularly in
search of, consequently, his time was limited for making obser-
vations on the habits of the birds he met. Nevertheless there
is a good deal in the book which will interest the student of
British birds, because Mr. Lodge was fortunate enough to
see and photograph, in their breeding haunts, many species
which very rarely wander to this country. Herons (he was
successful in photographing the rare Ardea alba at its nest)
and birds of prey seem to have engaged Mr. Lodge’s chief
attention, and his list of successful photographs of these birds
is remarkable. We may here mention that in making the
statement on p. 210 that the Common Bittern’s nest has not
been photographed, Mr. Lodge has overlooked Mr. Wade’s
successful photographs already published in this Magazine
(Vol. I., p. 329).
The simply-told narrative of the author’s experiences and
adventures is well worth reading, while the photographs, as
we should expect, are both numerous and excellent. The
book is nicely got up and well printed, but a tint of an
extremely inartistic yellow has been printed under some of the
best pictures, and forming a wide frame gives a most dis-
pleasing effect, and altogether spoils these really beautiful
photographs.—H.F.W.
_AN ILUSTRATED: MAGAZINE
- DEVOTEDTOTHEBIRDS: ON
=>. THE’ BRITISH!
FEBRUARY 1, : Vol. Hl.
1909. ar if No. 9.
> ie
NAUMANN’S “BIRDS OF MIDDLE EUROPE,” |
NAUMANN (J. F.). “ Naturgeschichte der Vogel Mitteleuropas. a Neubear- ia
beitet von Prof. R. Blasius, W. Blasius, R. Buri und herausgegeben yon
Carl R. Hennicke. Tubilaums-Prachtaysgabe. ;
430. PLATES BEAUTIFULLY REPRODUCED IN COLOUR from drawings by the}
well-known Bird Painter J. G. Keulemans, Bruno Geisler, E. de en
and others.
12 Vols.. Folio, Dresden, 1896—1904.
Bound in half cloth, £6 10s. net. Bound in half morocco, £8 8s. net.
A copy of this Werk in cloth was aes ly sole ace bys Auction at Messrs. Hodgsen's
alerocoms for
WILLIAMS & NORGATE, 14, Tae ‘Street, Covent Garden, London, W.C:
- DALLMEYER’S
Naturalists’ Camera,
1907, MODEL,
far Telephoto. or Oneary LENSES.
DALLMEYER’S
Lenses are used
by the most
skilled Bird
Photographers:
The following ave
Specially recommended :
THE STIGMATIC SERIES Il. F/6 (Convertible.
THE SERIES D PATENT PORTRAIT LENSES F 6.
(A Rapid Long Focus Lens at a Moderate Price.)
High or Moderate Power Telephoto Lenses (Original Make).
We are Specialists in Cameras and Apparatus for Photo- sire A
CATALOGUES AND ADVICE FREE.
J. H. DALLMEYER, Limitep, beNziL ap.,
Showrooms: 25, NEWMAN Sm, we. NEASDEN, LONDON, NW,
_ STEVENS AUCTION ROOMS.
Established 1 760.
SALE OF EGGS AND. BIRDS, oy
Ineluding a fine Specimen of a GREAT AUK’S EGG, a
On TUESDAY, FEBRUARY Sth, acne
Catalogue and all Particulars of
“J. C. STEVENS, 38, King Street, Covent Garden, Landon ie
DRTDABIRDS
PeeeeD BY HH. F. WITHERBY, F.Z5.,, M.B.O.U.
peeIsSlTED BY W. P. PYCRAFT, A.LS., M.B.0.U.
ContTENTS OF NuMBER 9, VoL. II. FEBRUARY 1, 1909.
Field Notes on the ‘‘ Powder-Down” ot the Heron, by
J. M. Dewar : .. Page 285
Some Early British Ornithologists and their Wor ks, by
Mow. Mullens, MA, LEM; M.B.0o.0. — VIT. —John
Ray (1627—1705) and Francis Willughby (1635—1672).
(Plate VI.) . on a Pe 290
Bird-Life in a Spring Snowstorm, by the Rev. A. Ellison,
M.A., B.D., M.B.O.U, 301
On the More Important Additions to our - Knowledge of
British Birds since 1899, by H. F. Witherby and N. F.
Ticehurst. Part XVII.—(continued from page 270) .. 305
Notes :—Wood-Pigeon Diphtheria (Eds.). Unusual Birds
in Hertfordshire (Hon. L. W. Rothschild, Ph.D., M.P.).
Song-Thrush’s Nest in December (H. W. Robinson).
Eversmann’s Warbler (Phylloscopus borealis) at Fair
Isle (H. F, W.). Little Owl in Hampshire (A. W.
Marriage). Montagu’s Harrier in Ireland (R. J.
Ussher). Iceland Falcon in Scotland (Fred. Smalley).
Food of the Red-Breasted Merganser (H, W. Robinson),
Smew in Montgomeryshire (H. E. Forrest). Red
Variety (P. montana) of the Common Partridge (C.
Ingram). The Average Weight of Snipe (Rev. Maurice
C. H. Bird). Pomatorhine Skua in Lancashire (Fred.
Smalley). Two Norfolk Levantine Shearwaters (H. F.
Witherby). Short Notes .. Az see a 309
Review :—The Food of Some British Birds ¥ fe 315
FIEL D NOTES ON THE: “POWDER-DOWN” OF
THE HERON.
BY
J. M. DEWAR.
THE Heron preens its plumage comparatively seldom,
and in this respect it differs from the majority of British
birds, which may be seen to do so at least once every day.
A summary is here given of observations which were made
in the autumn of 1907, after I had been on the look-out
during some half-a-dozen years for a Heron in the act of
attending to its plumage.
September 20th—a calm, sunny day. Two Herons
perched on a log-fence, and a third near them on grass
286 BRITISH BIRDS.
at the edge of a meadow. They faced the south and
were preening their feathers at 10 a.m., when first I saw
them. From the shelter of a wood about fifty yards away
I could see the bird on the grass, but not the other two
without risk of exposure. Ruffling out its plumage,
the Heron separated the right wing from the body and
insinuated the bill under the feathers in, as nearly as I
could judge, the position of the right breast powder-patch,
where it rubbed the bill slowly up and down, applying
the sides, the upper and the lower surfaces. It withdrew
the bill and preened the breast in the ordinary way,
leisurely drawing the bill among the feathers, biting at
their bases, and brushing them on both surfaces. With
intervals of rest and watching for signs of danger, it
preened its plumage, and had frequent recourse to the
areas of the powder-downs, where the movements of the
bill were always of the nature of a gentle to and fro
rubbing, directed to the whole surface of the bill.
Occasionally after preening it rubbed the bill by applying
the adjacent surfaces of two toes, and drawing them slowly
downwards over the bill. Before beginning to preen
again it rubbed the bill in one of the powder-downs. The
neck, breast, and ventral feathers received the most
attention, and the Heron spread the wings one at a time
and drew the bill downwards between each pair of remiges.
Then I noticed for the first time that the bill was coloured
pale blue, and had a dull appearance. On looking up
cautiously at the Herons on the fence I saw that their
bills were blue also, while the bill of a Heron which was
watching for food in sedge behind the three had a yellow-
ish colour. When the preening was finished the plumage
was fluffed out very much, and the bird stood erect with
its neck fully outstretched. The feathers hung loosely
in frills round the neck, across the breast, and encircling
each leg. The wings were allowed to fall downwards
and outwards from the shoulders, while the tips remained
crossed over the tail. Having completed its arrange-
ments it indulged in an unmistakable yawn. It stood
THE “POWDER-DOWN ” OF THE HERON. 287
thus for fully half-an-hour, in the warm sunshine, without
a movement except the occasional turning of its head, as
it surveyed the neighbourhood. About noon a pony which,
as I thought, had been watching the Herons for some time
ran across the field and drove them away. Before they
went I noticed that their bills were still bluish in colour.
October Ist—mild, sunny weather. Six Herons in
the sedge. Two came into the meadow and for a while
preened desultorily. The bill of each bird was yellowish
in colour. One bird stood in the usual attitude, without
shaking out its plumage, and at intervals smoothed
feathers here and there without having recourse to the
powder-downs. Its bill remained yellow. The second
bird began by shaking out its plumage to a marked degree
of fulness. Then it pressed its bill into the region of the
right breast powder-down and rubbed the bill up and
down gently. After preening a few feathers on the breast
it devoted its attention to the right wing, where it preened
the coverts, especially the lower, and drew its bill over
and among the remiges of the half-opened wing. The
left wing was preened less carefully. It was sunny then,
and at intervals the Heron held out its wings horizontally,
as Cormorants do. The wings trembled visibly at these
times, and the bird soon let them fall, as if tired. When
the bill was lifted from the powder-down the lower
mandible alone was of a bluish colour and, in the case of
the under coverts which were turned towards me, the
bill was introduced below each feather at the outer
border and drawn to the tip, so that the under-surface
of the bill came into contact with the under-surface of
each feather. This bird shook its bill vigorously sidewise
at times as if to get rid of something.
October 4th—a calm, sunny day. A Heron which had
been watching for food in the estuary stepped out of the
water and walked slowly some way over the sands. There
it shook itself so as to fluff out the plumage. At that
time the bill had a shining appearance, and was of a straw-
yellow colour. The Heron pressed its bill into the region
288 BRITISH BIRDS.
of the breast powder-downs and rubbed it gently up and
down. When the bill was withdrawn the lower mandible
was seen to have a dull bluish-white appearance against
the dark background of muddy sand. It preened the
feathers of the foreneck and breast, drawing out each long
feather by a slow movement of the bill from base to apex
and arranging the feathers parallel to one another. It
smoothed the anterior margins of the wings, and went
gradually over the whole of the lower plumage, the
shoulders and the wing coverts. During this lengthy
operation it had frequent recourse to the breast powder-
downs and to the inguinal areas latterly. The bill
gradually became yellow and glistening during the preen-
ing of the feathers, and after being in the region of a
powder-down a bluish-white colour appeared by contrast.
At the end of the general preening the Heron pressed the
bill into the region of the right breast powder-patch,
and rubbed the bill slowly up and down about twenty
times, the greatest number of times I had seen yet at a
single application. When the bill emerged its dull, blue-
white appearance was plain. Thus dusted, the Heron
applied its fore-neck and under mandible to the outer
surface of the right wing, beginning at the shoulder and
drawing the neck and bill gently over the coverts towards
the remiges four or five times. When this was done the
bill was bright yellow in colour and glistening in appear-
ance. After some further arranging of the feathers on
the anterior margin of the right wing, the Heron drew
in its plumage and walked back to the channel.
October 25th—mild and sunny. Two Herons alighted
in a pool on the shore and, in a little while, began to preen.
Their actions were similar to those already described.
Several times one of them reached over to the area of the
right femoral powder-patch and rubbed its bill there.
Once or twice they dipped their bills in the sea-water
before preening the feathers. They spent about half-an-
hour at this occupation and then went inland. Their
bills were yellowish in colour when they came. During
THE “POW DER-DOWN” OF THE HERON. 289
their stay the bill of the bird which had been applied to
the powder-patches so much became light blue in colour,
and remained so, while the other’s bill was yellowish in
colour, streaked at times with blue.
November 18th—a calm sunny day. A Heron perched
on the same fence, facing the south and with a fairly
warm sun shining on it. For about half-an-hour it preened
in a leisurely manner. At first the bill was yellow, and
yellow it remained. The Heron attended to the plumage
on the breast, the legs, the shoulders, and especially the
neck. It worked with the point of the bil) at the bases
of the feathers, and then drew it among them to their
tips. At no time was the flat of the bill used, nor did
“rubbing ” occur, and I did not see the bill once in the
areas of the powder-downs.
I had in mind two sources of error in these observations :
first, in determining the colour of the bill, and, secondly,
in estimating the relative importance of the powder-downs
to the general toilet.. The colours remained constant
when the light was reflected from the bill at various angles,
and at equal and different distances from two or more
birds. Lately I had an opportunity of examining a
Heron not long dead, and found that the bill was coated
readily with the powder, and while the blue colour was not
displayed prominently with the bird in the hand, it
became much more distinct when looked at from any
distance within reasonable limits. ‘“‘ Rubbing ” may be
the ordinary way of treating the powder-down patches.
On this point more observation is necessary, but con-
sidering the sequence of events as I have outlined them,
we may suppose that the powder is carried to other parts
of the body by means of the bill. On the dead bird,
after making some of the wing feathers ragged, I found
it easier to mat the rami with the aid of the powder than
without such help, and the powder has the further merit
of rendering the plumage highly waterproof, which is no
small advantage to a wading bird, whose plumes, in the
absence of powder, easily become draggled with wet.
( 290 )
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS
AND THEIR WORKS.
BY,
W. HE. MULLENS) (i:4:; nae, a eae
VII.—JOHN RAY (1627—1705) AND FRANCIS
WILLUGHBY (1685—1672).
(PratTE Vi.)
THE names of John Ray and Francis Willughby, the
founders of scientific ornithology in this country, must
ever be held in equal honour and esteem. Of very
different origin—Willughby being a country gentleman
of means, descended from a long line of illustrious
ancestors, and Ray the poor son of a village blacksmith—
a common devotion to the study of natural history made
them close friends and zealous fellow workers. ‘Together
they studied, together they travelled, and together they
collected.”’ To separate their joint work or to credit
one with a greater share in devising the scientific classi-
fication of the subjects they studied, is as impossible
as it is invidious. The misfortune of Willughby’s pre-
mature death, and the fact that his posthumous works
were edited by his friend, and that the latter became not
only an eminent ornithologist, but also world-famous
as a botanist, have undoubtedly tended to obscure
Willughby’s claim to an equal recognition. Had he,
however, been spared to accomplish his allotted share
of their joint labours he would undoubtedly have achieved
as great a reputation as his famous friend. In the course
of their investigations these two eminent men having
become “ dissatisfied with the status of natural history,
agreed to attempt a systematic description of the whole
organic world,” in which their different parts were
apportioned according to the following method, as is
detailed by Dr. Derham from information he received
when he visited John Ray at Black Notley in May, 1704
(Memorials of Ray, p. 33): ‘‘ For these two gentlemen,
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 291
finding the ‘ History of Nature’ very imperfect, had
agreed between themselves, before their travels beyond
sea, to reduce the several tribes of things to a method ;
and to give accurate descriptions of the several species,
from a strict view of them. And forasmuch as Mr.
Willughby’s genius lay chiefly to animals, therefore he
undertook the birds, beasts, fishes, and insects, as Mr. Ray
did the vegetables. And how each of these two great
men discharged his province, the world hath seen in their
works ; which show that Mr. Ray lived to bring his part
to great perfection ; and that Mr. Willughby carried his
as far as the utmost application and diligence of a short
life could enable him.” The period in which Ray and
Willughby flourished is justly described by Linnzeus as
the dawn of the golden age in natural history. Before
their great work was undertaken, ornithology as a science
could scarcely be said to exist. It is true that an
Englishman, Edward Wootton (1492-1555), had in a
folio work entitled :—
Edoardi Wotto- / ni Oxoniensis de / Differentis Ani- /
malium Libri / Decem. / Ad Sereniss. Angliae Regem /
Edoardum VI. / ... . itemque singulae eorum partes
recensentur, . . . . Lutetiae Parisiorum / apud
Vascosanum. / M.D.LII. / Cum privilegio Regis.
made some attempt at a systematic arrangement of
birds, but he did not profess to do more than give a
compilation from the classical authors, while the standard
authorities of the day, Gesner and Aldrovandus, were
full of obscurity and mistakes.
In England itself the study of zoology had hitherto
received but scant attention, hence “ observing in this
busie and inquisitive age the History of Animals alone
to have been in a great measure neglected by English men
(for that since Turner* and Mouffett none that I know
of have performed anything worthy of commendation).
... . Our main design was to illustrate the History of
* William Turner (1500-1568), author of ‘* Avium Historia.”
+ Thomas Mouffet (1553-1604), author of ‘ Insectorum Theatrum.”’
292 BRITISH BIRDS.
Birds, which is (as we said before of Animals in general)
in many particulars confused and obscure, by so
accurately describing each kind, and observing their
Characteristics and distinctive notes, that the Reader
might be sure of our meaning, and upon comparing any
Bird with our description not fail in discerning whether
it be the described or no. Nor will it be difficult to find
out any unknown Bird that shall be offered: for Com-
paring it with the Tables first the Characteristic notes of
the genus’s from the highest or first downward will easily
guide him to the lowest genus ; among the species whereof,
being not many, by comparing it also with the several
descriptions the Bird may soon be found” (Preface to
the Ornithology).
John Ray, the son of Roger and Elizabeth Ray, was
born in the parish of Black Notley, in Essex, in the
autumn of 1627, possibly on November 29th; and was
baptized on December 6th of that same year. The date
of Ray’s birth and baptism have proved a stumbling
block to most of his biographers. This arises from the
coincidence that on the same page of the parish register
at Black Notley are recorded the baptisms of two John
Rays, in the successive years of 1627 and 1628, as will be
seen from the reproduction of these entries here ae
They run as follows :—
(1627) John [son] of Roger and Elizabeth Ray Decem-
ber 6.
(1628) John son of Thomas and Dorothie Wray bapt.
June 29:7
The latter of these two entries has apparently been
mistaken as referring to John Ray the naturalist. William
Derham, in his ‘Select Remains and Life of Ray” *
gives the date of Ray’s birth as November 29th, 1628,
and then in a footnote informs us that on “‘ searching the
parish registers”? it was discovered that “he was
baptized on the 29th of June, 1628; consequently the
* Included in the “Memorials of John Ray.’? London, 1846,
1 vol., 8vo.
THE
ORNITHOLOGY
Pen CTS Were Oe est
OrF
Middleton n the County of Warwick F{g;
Fellow of the Royvaz Socrery.
Ju Thee Books.
Wherein All the
BIR ODS
BIPHER TO KNOWN;
Being reduced into a Mert uo futable to their Natures,
are accurately defcribed.
The Defcriptions illuftrated by moft ai FEDS nearly refembling
the live Bi R Ds, Engraven in LXXVIII Copper Plates.
Tranflated into Englifh, and enlarged with many Additions
throughout the whole Work.
To which are added,
Three Confiderable DISCOURSES,
fT, Ofthe Artof Fowtinc: Witha Defcription
of feveral Ne rs intwo large Copper Plates.
“II. OF the Ordering of Stncine Birops.
Of Fatrconry.
BY
FOHN_RAY, Fellow of the Royvar Socrery.
Pfalm 104. 24.
How manifold are thy works,O Lord? In wifdom haft thon made them all : The Earth is
full of thy riobes.
LONDON:
Printed by A.C. for Jobn Martyn, Printer to the Royal Society, at the Bell in
St. Paxls Church-Yard, MDCLXXVIIL
a
ad
#4)
a A
= 2
~*~
me 2, Fe. ae |
=
es
aa od
A
M
-
af
a
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 293
above date, as the supposed one of his birth, is incorrect.”
Acting on this ingenious hypothesis, Ray’s subsequent
biographers have fixed his birth on November 29th,
1627, and his baptism on June 29th, 1628.*
Ray was the son of the village blacksmith, and the
house which now stands opposite the forge in Black
Notley is said to have been his birthplace. Although of
humble origin. he received an excellent education : first
at the Grammar School in the neighbouring town of
Braintree, and afterwards at St. Catherine’s Hall (where
he only remained for a short time), and Trinity College,
Cambridge. At Trinity he obtained a fellowship in 1649,
and afterwards filled many important offices in his College.
Ray remained at Cambridge for several years. From
the University he commenced his earlier “ Itineraries,”
journeys which he undertook for the sake of observation
and the collection of plants, and of which he kept an
account. The first of these he undertook alone in 1658, but
in many of the subsequent ones he was accompanied by
Francis Willughby, proceeding on different occasions
as far as Scotland and Cornwall. At Cambridge, Ray
published the first of his numerous works, a small 8vo
volume entitled ‘“‘Catalogus Plantarum Circa Canta-
brigiam nascentium.’” This appeared in 1660, and in
the same year Ray entered into holy orders. T'wo years
later his connection with his College came to an end.
Refusing to subscribe to the “ Act of Uniformity ” of
1662, he resigned his fellowship, and being now at greater
liberty he resolved to pursue his studies in Natural history
still more ardently, and for that purpose to extend his
travels beyond the confines of his own country.
Accordingly in the spring of 1663, Ray, with two oi
his pupils,t and accompanied by Willughby, left England
for France, and after ‘‘ passing through divers parts of
* Vide art. ‘“‘ Dict. Nat. Biogr.” ‘Ray, John (1627-1705), naturalist,
was born at Black Notley, near Braintree, Es-ex, probably on
29th Nov., 1627. He was baptized on 29th June, 1628.”
+ Mr. Skippon (afterwards Sir Philip) and Mr. N. Bacon.
294, BRITISH BIRDS.
Europe ”’ returned to this country in 1665, having parted
company from Willughby during the latter part of the
journey. On his return to his native country, Ray
devoted his serious attention (as he wrote to Dr. Martin
Lister) to “ gathering up into a catalogue all such plants
as I had found at any time growing wild in England
. . . . possibly one day they may see the light : at present
the world is glutted with Dr. Merrett’s bungling ‘ Pinax.’ *
[ resolve never to put out anything which is not as perfect
as it is possible for me to make it.”’ These labours bore
fruit in after years, when Ray published his “‘ Catalogus
Plantarum Angliae,’ and his yet more famous
“Synopsis Methodica Stirpium Britannicarum,” the
second edition of which, published in 1696, set the seal
on his fame as a botanist. In 1667 Ray was persuaded
to become a Fellow of the Royal Society, and in 1670
he changed the spelling of his name, which he had hitherto
written Wray, by dropping the initial “* W,” thus return-
ing, as he informed his correspondent Martin Lister, in
a letter written August 22nd, 1670, to the style used by
his ancestors. In 1672 Ray suffered a great blow by the
death of his intimate friend and companion, Francis
Willughby, who died in this year “‘to the infinite and
unspeakable loss and grief of myself, his friends, and all
good men.” To Ray’s guardianship Willughby com-
mitted his two sons, and further left. him an annuity of
sixty pounds, which formed his chief means of support
during the remainder of his life. Faithful to his trust,
Ray now took up his residence at Middleton Hall, the
Warwickshire seat of his late benefactor, and in 1673
he was married to Margaret Oakley, in Middleton Church.
The year 1674 saw the publication of Ray’s first contri-
bution to ornithology, entitled :—
A / Collection of English Words / not generally used
.... / and catalogues of English Birds / and Fishes
i. / London... 1674-4 vol” ane
* «Pinax Rerum,” by Christopher Merrett. London, 1666,
1 vol., 8vo.
JOHN Ray.
(From the Engraving by H. Meyer, after a Picture in the British Museum.)
{‘ oF oe Kaede phd ee is cs shen Ke. cor 4 » the” eee
f r
a tan
. “eh, we ee oe {é@ .
ied ft ‘of Linky a oh on oe ,
Mins sn opps ae oe 9 oe
of {lei 07 af rit, a as i i
Dy ie ee :
Clay ¢ Eas ct vy saat hy Gul
| ge Y Vary Long. Soop.
‘ Nar hishiade Y- ‘A. 3.
Ui 1g Se Pocket A ect ‘ay Vee 2B
Aagio” £, Ame Sofas bs
Aig: 26.
oF Cag Y yy fe
pote ge 9 a se Llop J3 Fe
sie 1> Gh rh tye : sh, none aces if M imit fad Dufre ot
ee | Bast Raven Ray Ea) eta « o ‘ “Sh
i Mee ee ’ oes a. 7% (he © Frannie Serco E
nae Pog pongo login Mealy ae
i Digs gs aS | woe rp
x. Ss ate fe oe hi r fi Cera ©
yee is “augln e re ad De. 4 Wat Lets. ca
é& . oh “ur he. Ce pf
o &
ese Wares; 30
Mire " t GBoehopl: § ng a
t Wid lees «ieee yom fi PORE CT ey g
' [nf Sam06 6 Sans Puybe he. “fee Sony
sin [Ae ee ee ee
Poitier, 6p po ting wit La :
! evi oy ie oe Re as, Sr go tik Shi Lome
does op isha! efoF Re oF osx hae ery)
£ Tagan ss e > sb of A ©. els, ‘in
+4 « nts Prrea we Ot nr - *
§ trod buy Av? fos bv. <teny het v fa. ee a
} rE wets " 2 ‘£
2 Pom coo frm POS 4
ef BM Nes oN E Sma hd ue
Me : i ae ~ (629 |
4 a P of
Entry in Parish Register of John Ray’s Baptism,
and that of another John Ray.
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 297
The catalogue of Birds, which was an imperfect one,
was omitted in subsequent editions, and Ray now com-
menced to engage himself on a far more important work,
the arrangement and _ publication of the notes and
observations about birds which had _ been left by
Willughby as his share of their undertaking in the study
of natural history. This posthumous work of Willughby’s
Ray published in Latin in 1676, under the title
“ Ornithologia libri Tres,” the English edition of the
same appearing in 1678. This, the well-known
“ Ornithology of Francis Willughby,” was edited by Ray
“with large editions.” A facsimile of the title-page is
here given, the collation of the book being: 1 vol. folio ;
pee t2.0un =. pp. 441: =; pp. 6, Index. 2) "plates of
fowling and LXXXVIII. of birds.* A catalogue of
English birds appears on pp. 21-28, some 190 species in
all being mentioned. How much original matter Ray
added to Willughby’s labours it is impossible exactly to
determine, but it was evidently not inconsiderable, for
not only did he, as he tells us in his preface, add the
“descriptions and histories of those [birds] that were
wanting,”’ these being principally those recently discovered
in the Indies and the New World, but he also added a
good deal of information which he received from certain
of his fellow-countrymen, notably from Sir Thomas
Browne, of Norwich, who “frankly communicated the
Drafts of several rare Birds, with some brief notes and
descriptions of them,” and also from Mr. Jessop and Sir
Philip Skippon. His most important assistance,
however, came from Mr. Ralph Johnson, of Brignal, in
Yorkshire, who is described by Ray as ‘“‘a person of
singular skill in Zoology, especially the History of Birds,”
and who appears to have been not only an observer of
nature far in advance of his time, but also to have in-
* The engravings which were executed at the expense of Mrs.
Willughby, are poor, and Ray laments that although he employed
good workmen the great distance he was from London necessitated
all directions and descriptions passing by letter. and observes that “in
many Sculps they have not satisfied me.”’
298 BRITISH BIRDS.
vented a “method of Birds’ which was freely used by
Ray ‘in the divisions and characteristic notes of the
genera.” In 1676 Ray left Middleton Hall, his two young
pupils having ceased to be under his tuition, and removed
to Falborne Hall, near Black Notley, the residence. of
Mr. Edward Bullock, to whose son Ray probably acted
as tutor, and to whom he dedicated the “ Stirpium
EKuropeanarum ... . Sylloge” in 1694.
In 1678 Elizabeth Ray, the naturalist’s mother, died,
and Ray then took up his abode at her house on
‘* Dewlands,”’ in Black Notley, where, said he, “‘ I intend,
God willing, to settle for the short pittance of time I have
yet to live in this world.” Ray now settled down to un-
interrupted work, and in 1682 published his *‘ Methodus
Plantarum nova,” in which he proposed a
‘new method of classifying plants, which when altered and
amended as it subsequently was by himself at a later period,
unquestionably formed the basis of that method which under
the name of the system of Jussieu is universally received at
the present day.”
In addition to his own numerous labours Ray also
continued to deal with the mass of material left to him
by his friend, Francis Willughby, and in 1686 he published
the ‘‘ Historia Piscium,’ 1 vol. folio, which “‘ he had
extracted out of Mr. Willughby’s papers, revised, supplied,
methodized and fitted for the press.”” This Ichthyology
was, by the assistance of Bishop, Fell, printed at Oxford,
the Royal Society defraying the expense. The “ History
of Fishes”? was, as Ray laments in a letter to his friend,
Dr. Tancred Robinson, far from being as complete as it
should have been, most of the notes which he and
Willughby had made in the course of their travels having
been mislaid.*
It is here quite impossible to enumerate all the works
which came year after year from Ray’s pen; a list of
them will be found in the ‘‘ Memorials of Ray ” (p. 111).
* This refers to their joint notes; of Willughby’s notes Ray
writes ‘‘ it is almost impossible to procure a sight of them.”
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 299
Ray’s final contribution to ornithology was the “‘ Synopsis
Methodica Avium,’ which was completed in 1694, but
not published till after his death in 1713. “In this
synopsis Mr. Ray added many species of birds and fishes
which were omitted in Mr. Willughby’s histories of
them,” and by way of a supplement added a short
catalogue with figures of “Avium Maderaspatanarum,”’
or “Indian Birds about Fort St. George,’ compiled by
James Petiver (1663-1718), and of interest as being “ the
first attempt to catalogue the Birds of any part of the
British possessions in India ”’ (cf. Newton, Dict. of Birds,
Introduction, p. 7).
Ray’s health now began to fail, and in 1704 he passed
away at Black Notley “in a house of his own building ”
called ‘‘ Dewlands ” (destroyed by fire in 1900). He lies
buried in the churchyard of his native parish, where his
sadly neglected grave requires prompt attention, if the
several inscriptions that his monument bears are to remain
decipherable. |
Of Ray’s influence on natural history it is impossible
to say too much. His works on zoology, in the words of
Cuvier, ““ may be considered as the foundation of modern
zoology,’ and by Haller he was termed “the greatest
botanist in the memory of man.”
Of the short but busy life of Francis Willughby it is
necessary to say but little. He was born in 1635, the
only son of Sir Francis Willughby, Knt., of Middleton Hall,
Warwickshire. At the age of seventeen he became a
fellow Commoner of Trinity College, Cambridge, and there
formed the acquaintance of John Ray, with whose labours
in natural history his name will ever be associated. It
has been generally asserted that Willughby was Ray’s
pupil at the University, but what little evidence exists
on the matter is rather against this supposition. In 1655
Willughby took his degree as B.A., and proceeded M.A.
in 1659. That he had early begun to assist Ray in his
work is evident from the allusions in the latter’s
“Catalogus Plantarum Circa Cantabrigiam,’’ which was
300 BRITISH BIRDS.
published in 1660. In the preface to that work Ray
writes as follows :—
‘“ Jam quoniam honestum est fateri per quos profeceris,
generossimi Juvenes, D. Franciscus Willughby et D. Petrus
Courthorpe * Armigeri, natalium splendore ingenii sublimitate.
Suavite morum, fide, virtute illustres, non rei duntaxat
herbariae callentissimi, sed in omni literarum genere versa-
tissimi, amici nostri, plurimum honorandi, non sunt a nobis
silentio transmuttendi, ni ingrati & arrogantes esse velimus.
Horum opera nos saepius usos & ab his non mediocriter
adpitos fuisse in hoc opusculo, Concinnando, libere & ingenue
profitemur.”’
In 1663 Willughby, who had already accompanied Ray
in some of his expeditions in Great Britain, went with
him on his journey to the continent, but they parted
company the next year at Montpelier, and Willughby
continued his journey through Spain alone. It should
here be mentioned that Willughby’s name appeared as_
one of the original Fellows of the Royal Society on its
incorporation in 1663-4. In 1665, on the death of his
father, Willughby succeeded to the estates of Wollaton
and Middleton, and in 1668 married Emma, daughter
of Sir Thomas Bernard, by whom he had two sons and a
daughter. His great devotion to work seems to have
overtaxed his strength, and on December 22nd, 1670,
Dr. Martin Lister, writing to Ray, says, “Il am very glad
Mr. Willughby is near well again. Methinks he is very
valetudinary, and you have often alarm’d me with his
IllInesses.”” In the beginning of June, 1672, * he fell into
a pleurisie which terminated in that kind of fever called
Cattarrhalis.”’
He died on July 3rd, 1672, “to the immense grief of
his friends and all good men that knew him, and the
great loss of the commonwealth in general.’ Thus was
frustrated his project of a voyage to the New World,
“that he might perfect the History of Animals.”
* Mr. Peter Courthorpe, of Danny, in Sussex; a friend and pupil of
John Ray’s, to him Ray dedicated the ‘‘ Collection of English Words,”
published in 1674.
(301)
BIRD-LIFE IN A SPRING SNOWSTORM.
BY
THe Rev. A. ELLISON, M.a., B.D., M.B.O.U.
THE series of snowstorms which visited nearly all parts
of the British Islands in the fourth week of April, 1908,
was probably unprecedented for so late a date in the
spring. Coming at the very height of the spring migra-
tion, and at a time when nearly all our resident birds
were breeding, the result must have been, for the time
at least, extremely disastrous ; and it furnished a good
illustration both of the calamities to which wild creatures
may be exposed, and also of Nature’s wonderful recuper-
ative powers.
In mid-Hertfordshire the season, though cold and
changeable, was not on the whole unfavourable to bird-
life up to April 18th. The spring, however, was distinctly
backward. Chiffchaffs had appeared in their usual
numbers by April Ist. Willow-Warblers and Swallows
were first observed on the 15th, but only one or two;
the majority had not come; while the great body of
April migrants still held back, waiting for kinder condi-
tions. But resident birds were, perhaps, a week late on
the average in breeding, not more. An early Robin had
young well advanced on April 15th. Several others had
hatched out by the 22nd. I knew of a good number
of Lapwings’ nests with incubated eggs between those
two dates ; one had been hatched off on the 22nd, while
every hedge or plantation was full of nests of Thrush or
Blackbird with eggs or callow young.
Heavy snow showers had occurred, sufficient to whiten
the country, on the 19th and 20th, with sharp frosts
at night; but not enough to cause any serious danger
to bird-life. However, early in the afternoon of the
23rd a cold rain gave place to snow, which increased to
a blizzard, and lasted without cessation for sixteen hours.
On the morning of the 24th the country was covered
with snow to an average of eight inches in depth, while
502 BRITISH BIRDS.
in many lanes the northerly gale had heaped up drifts
of three or four feet. Temperature had fallen to 28°,
the result being that the snow, which at first had partially
thawed, had frozen and clung to trees and bushes to such
an extent as to break down large branches, or to bend
shrubs prostrate to the ground. Even at noon it still
froze in the shade, and roofs and stacks, where the sun
did not reach, were decorated with long fringes of
icicles.
What the effect of such an occurrence was upon bird-
life it was not easy fully to ascertain. But there can
be little doubt that young birds which had recently left
their nests for the most part perished. I saw no trace,
after the snow, of broods of young Thrushes which had
left the nest just before. A great many nestlings also
perished, but no inconsiderable number survived, where
the nests were in sheltered situations. But it must
have been extremely difficult for the parents to feed them
during the two days when the ground was snow-covered.
However, the manner in which many nests escaped
was truly marvellous, and indicated a wonderful devotion
and intelligence on the part of their owners. Lapwings’
nests, which, of all others, were as one would think,
most exposed to the fury of the elements, passed through
the ordeal uninjured. One, found by me on April 16th,
with four eggs far advanced in incubation, had been
hatched off on the 22nd, the day before the snowstorm.
On the 27th I visited the spot, and, although I could not
find the young, I felt convinced that they had survived
from the clamorous cries of the parent birds whenever I
approached the neighbourhood of the nest.
A nest, with four eggs, in a neighbouring field, dis-
covered on the 17th, was quite intact, the bird still
sitting and the eggs warm. This clutch afterwards
hatched off safely, and yet the nest must have been
surrounded with snow six inches deep. The case of this
nest would suggest that in the other instance, where the
young had left the nest, they might have been kept
BIRD-LIFE IN A SPRING SNOWSTORM. 308
together and covered by the parents, and so protected
from the inclement conditions. But the question how
they could have been fed is a difficult one.
Early in April [ had found a Robin’s nest on a wayside
bank. It was situated, not in a crevice, but on the flat
ground at the top of the bank, under a thick tuft of old
grass. It was at the extremity of a kind of tunnel, roofed
over by some pieces of stick and the thick tangled grass.
The Robin’s nest was at the top of the bank on the right hand of
the photograph.
On the 21st it contained six eggs, and I placed in it two
more, from a deserted nest not far off, so that it contained ©
the large number of eight eggs. I had never yet seen the
bird on the nest, and the eggs were cold and remained so,
so that I thought the bird had deserted in consequence
of my intermeddling in her domestic matters. On the
23rd came the great snow, and the following morning the
nest was buried under drifts from one to two feet deep.
The snow had drifted through the hedge, and formed
504 BRITISH BIRDS.
wreaths over the spot. Yet when I looked at the nest
on the 29th, after the snow had disappeared, the bird
was sitting, as if nothing had happened, and the eggs
were slightly incubated. In due time all the eight eggs
hatched out, and the young were safely reared. It is
quite impossible that the bird can have sat on this nest
during the snow. Indeed, the place was so thoroughly
drifted over that I could not identify the exact situation
of the nest. There was nothing but a wilderness of
compact snow wreaths, and if the bird had been sitting
she must have ‘been a prisoner for nearly three days.
The eggs, remaining fresh, were protected by the thick
roof formed by the grass tuft and sticks, from the super-
incumbent snow; while the inherent warmth of the
ground underneath kept them from being chilled or
frozen. So soon as the snow was gone they were ready
for incubation, and the bird returned to them.
The rush of migrants which came as soon as the weather
changed was most remarkable. On the 25th the Blackcap
was singing in my garden, although the country was still
snow-covered, and there were heavy snowstorms again
that evening. On the 26th the call of the Wryneck was
heard from the tall elms. But on the 28th the tempera-
ture at last rose to 58°, and nearly all the summer birds
appeared at once. Cuckoos were calling loudly, and
the country seemed alive with Willow-Warblers in full
song. Many Swallows were about, and the Sand-Martin
colonies were in full force. Tree-Pipits were singing,
and at 11 p.m. the songs of Nightingales could be heard
in all directions. Encouraged by a summer temperature
on the first two days of May, the Lesser Whitethroat,
Swift, and Spotted Flycatcher were all up to time, on
the 2nd, 3rd, and 6th of the month respectively. And
at the end of the first week of May, the sycamore, beech,
and other trees, which had been still bare at the close of
April, were thick with leaves, while the general aspect
of the country showed little trace of the wintry ordeal
through which it had so lately passed.
( 305)
ON THE MORE IMPORTANT ADDITIONS TO OUR
KNOWLEDGE OF BRITISH BIRDS SINCE 1899.
BY
H. F. WITHERBY anp M. F. TICEHURST.
Part XVII.
(Continued from page 270.)
BLACK TERN Hydrochelidon nigra (L.). 8S. page 633.
Scitty IsLEs.—Seen every now and then on the pools of
Tresco in immature plumage in autumn, and sometimes in
August. Seven were seen on St. Mary’s on April 10th, 1903,
and four at Tresco on April 26th, 1905 (J. Clark and F. R.
Rodd, Zool., 1906, p. 342).
CoRNWALL.—A flock of twenty-five to thirty seen first on
April 19th, 1901, frequented Marazion Marsh, near Penzance,
for some days (A. W. H. Harvey, t.c., 1901, p. 188). Until
the last few years, rarely recorded in spring, but since 1900 it
has been observed every year in April (J. Clark and F. R.
Rodd, t.c., 1906, p. 342).
HAMPSHIRE.—T'wo immature birds were shot near Ringwood
in August, 1905 (G. B. Corbin, é.c., 1905, p. 394).
OxFORDSHIRE.—Mr. O. V. Aplin considers it may be an
annual visitor to the Thames in this county (¢.c., 1903, p. 453).
One was seen on June 26th, 1903, near Bampton (O. V. Aplin,
t.c., 1905, p. 449). One was seen at Oxford on June 11th,
1904 (cd., t.c., 1906, p. 447).
DErRBy.—One was killed at Etwell in the late summer of
1900 (F. C. R. Jourdain, t.c., 1902, p. 455), and another at
Aston Hall on August 27th, 1908 (2d. in litt.).
CHESHIRE.—Three in breeding plumage were seen at
Budworth Mere on June 4th, 1900, and an immature bird was
seen there on September 6th, 1903, and others on August 19th
and 26th, 1905 (F. 8S. Graves, t.c., 1901, p. 188; C. Oldham,
t.c., 1903, p. 393, 1905, p. 393).
BRECONSHIRE.—I'wo were shot on Llangorse Lake in 1889
(E. Cambridge Phillips, B. of Brecon, p. 134).
NortH WALES.—Somewhat rare; met with chiefly on the
estuaries (H. E. Forrest, Vert. fF. N. Wales, p. 369).
IsLE or Man.—An immature specimen was shot on October
15th, 1903, on Langness (P. G. Ralfe, Zool., 1903, p. 461).
YORKSHIRE.—Not uncommon in spring and autumn (T. H.
Nelson, B. of Yorks, p. 648).
306 BRITISH BIRDS.
CUMBERLAND.—One was seen at Ravenglass on May 6th,
1907 (H. W. Robinson, Field, 22, v1., 07).
On the eastern side of England, south of Yorkshire, the
Black Tern would appear by the records to be an annual bird
of passage, and we have not thought it worth while to give
the records.
ScorLanp.—The following have been recorded in Scotland
during the period under notice :—1899, August 7th, Forth,
one; 1901, end of September, Tay, two; 1902, June 2nd,
Tweed, several near Hawick ; 1904, September 7th, Midlothian,
one at Gladhouse Reservoir; November 26th, East Lothian,
one at Gullane ; 1908, May 30th, Tweed, one.
WHITE-WINGED BLACK TERN Hydrochelidon leucoptera
(Schinz). S. page 635.
Norroitk.—Hight were seen on Breydon by Mr. Jary on
April 22nd, 1901, and asingle bird on May 15th (J. H. Gurney,
Zcol., 1902, p. 88).
Kent.— Five were shot out of a small flock at Dungeness
on May 29th, 1904 (N.F.T.).
WHISKERED TERN JHydrochelidon hybrida (Pallas).
S. page 637.
Kent and Sussex.—An adult male was shot at Rye
Harbour on August 9th, 1905, and is now in the Booth
Museum. Four or five others were shot about the same time
near Lydd and Pevensey (N.F.T.).
CASPIAN TERN Sterna caspia Pall. 8S. page 641.
NorFroLtk.—One was watched by Messrs. Patterson, Eldred,
and Jary at Breydon on July 21st and 22nd, 1901 (J. H.
Gurney, Zool., 1902, p. 91). One was seen on Breydon by
Mr. G. Jary on July 24th, 1902 (id., t.c., 1903, p. 132, and
A. Patterson, f.c., 1902, p. 391).
Kent must for the present be struck out of the list of
counties in which this bird has occurred, as Mr. J. H. Gurney’s
record (é.c., 1887, p. 458) from Thompson’s ‘‘ Notebook of a
Naturalist ” (p. 265) was based on a misreading of the name
cantiaca for caspia.
Norrs.—One at Caythorpe on May 17th, 1863 (J. Whitaker,
B. of Notts, p. 279) does not seem to have been noted in the
‘* Manual.”
SANDWICH TERN Sterna cantiaca J. F. Gm. S. page 643.
GUERNSEY.—‘‘ Fairly plentiful here [Guernsey], and I know
places where it breeds’ (Gordon Dalgleish, Zool., 1903, p. 277).
Scitty Istes.—In 1903 at least one pair hatched a brood,
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 507
but the bird is no longer a regular breeder at Scilly (J. Clark
and F. R. Rodd, t.c., 1906, p. 343).
Lancs.—Mr. T. Hepburn could not find any on Walney
Island in June, 1901 (é.c., 1902, p. 377).
CUMBERLAND.—The Ravenglass colony is steadily increasing
in numbers (C. Oldham, t.c., 1908, p. 165).
NorFoLK.—‘“ Probably bred in Norfolk in 1893” (Vict. Hist.
Norfolk).
TRELAND.—A colony (twenty pairs were seen) was found on
Lough Erne (co. Fermanagh) in 1900 (R. Warren, Jrish Nat.,
1900 (p. 220). A few nests were found by Mr. H.S. Gladstone
on an island in Lough Conn (co. Mayo) in 1903, and in May,
1906, a considerable colony (thirty-seven nests found) was
discovered by Mr. Warren on another island in the same lough
(R. Warren, Zool., 1906, p. 277). In 1906 two small colonies
were found in co. Down (R. Patterson, /. Nat.. 1906, p. 192).
ROSEATE TERN Sterne dougalli Mont. 8S. page 645.
NORTHUMBERLAND.—Farne Islands.—In an article on the
history and status of this species by Rev. F. L. Blathwayt
(Zool., 1902, p. 52), it is stated that two pairs bred up to 1897.
In 1898 five or six pairs were seen, but in 1899 only two pairs
were reported ; while in 1900 it was thought that only one pair
inhabited the Islands.
NorFoLtK.—One seen at Blakeney Point and at Wells
throughout May, June and July, 1902, and is thought to have
paired with a Common Tern and nested. Its identity seems to
have been fairly established (J. H. Gurney, t.c., 1903, p. 131).
One seen at Blakeney on May 29th, 1903 (7d., t.c., 1904, p. 208).
NortH Wates.—The colony on the Skerries has been
considerably reduced, but steps have now been taken to pre-
serve the birds. There is another colony, the locality of
which is not divulged (H. E. Forrest, Vert. F. N. Wales, p.
371), and the numbers here are well maintained (F. C. R.
Jourdain, in litt.).
IRELAND.—As a breeding species it seems to have ceased to
exist. One ‘“‘ was shot on the coast of Connaught on August
3rd, 1904” (R. J. Ussher, List of 1. Birds, p. 48).
COMMON TERN Sterna fluviatilis Naum. S. page 647.
SHETLAND.—Nesting in some numbers in 1901 for the first
time (W. E. Clarke, Ann. S.N.H., 1902, p. 121).
Farr Iste (Shetlands).—Numbers migrating on September
Lith and 12th, 1906 (d.,t.c., L907, p. 79).
Barra (Outer Hebrides).—Seen in summer in 1900 and
1903 (i.c., 190Y, p. 143; 1903, p. 15; 1904, p. 216). There is
308 BRITISH BIRDS.
apparently little previous evidence of its occurrence in the
islands strictly included in the Outer Hebrides.
[NoRFOLK.—One is said to have been picked up dead in
January, 1906, on the edge of Thetford Warren (J. H.
Gurney, Zool., 1907, p. 122).]
LITTLE TERN Sterna minuta L. S. page 651.
Sctitty Istanps.—Though it breeds in Cornwall, it appears
to be only a casual visitor to the Scillies (J. Clark, Zool., 1906,
p. 343).
IsLE or Man.—A small colony was found in 1898 (P. Ralfe,
t.c., 1899, p. 32).
ScorLanp.—From Tay to Dee, common and increasing
(J. A. Harvie-Brown, Fauna of Tuy Basin, p. 334).
SHETLAND.—Six adults at Grutness Voe on September 20th,
1900. Not previously recorded from Shetland (W. E. Clarke
and TG. Laidlaw, Ann. S.N.H-:, 1901, p. 11L).
OutER Hxesripes.—Barra.—Five pairs nesting on a small
island in 1901 (W. L. MacGillivray, t.c., 1901, p. 237); also
noted there in 1902-3, but since then has not been seen
(N. B. Kinnear, ¢.c., 1907, p. 81; cf: also aniea, Vol. 1, pp:
193 and 232).
SOOTY TERN Sterna fuliginosa J. F. Gm. 8. page 653.
SuFFoLK.—An adult in good plumage, which had apparently
died from exhaustion, was found on the heathland between
Thetford and Brandon, at the end of March or beginning of
Apri!, 1900, by Messrs. J. Nunn and G. Mortimer. It was
stuffed and remained wrongly identified until 1903, when
Mr. W. G. Clarke saw it and identified it as a Sooty Tern,
which was confirmed by Mr. T. Southwell (W. G. Clarke,
Zool., 1903, p. 393).
Lancs.—One was picked up alive, but in an exhausted
condition,¥in the early morning, on October 9th, 1901, in a
street in Hulme, near Manchester (H. Saunders, Bull. B.O.C.,
XII., p. 26; see also C. Oldham, Zool., 1902, p. 355).
These are the fourth and fifth examples recorded in this
country of this species.
NODDY TERN Anous stolidus (L.). 8. page 655.
Mr. R. J. Ussher’s reasons, as expressed in his lately pub-
lished ‘‘ List of Irish Birds,” for excluding this bird from the
British avifauna, have already been given (see antea, p. 248).
For further details with regard to the specimen said to
have been shot on the Dee marshes see Coward and Oldham,
‘‘ Birds of Cheshire,” p. 229.
(To be continued.)
WOOD-PIGEON DIPHTHERIA.
We would remind our readers that the schedules relating to
this enquiry, which were attached to the November number
of BririsH Birps, should be filled in and posted to us by
March Ist. We may here reiterate the hope expressed on
page 199, that. our readers will make such a response to the
request for information that the enquiry may be made really
useful. We cannot remind observers too often that negative
evidence which affects the distribution either of the birds or
the disease is of equal importance to positive evidence.—EDs.
UNUSUAL BIRDS IN HERTFORDSHIRE.
Lone-TAILED Duck (Harelda glacialis).
An immature male Long-tailed Duck was shot on the
reservoirs at Tring on November 20th, 1908. We have
previously had one visit from this species, an adult ¢ shot
November 12th, 1906.
PALLAS’s SAND-GROUSE (Syrrhaptes paradoxus).
On December Ist I saw a flock of seven or eight Pallas’s
Sand-Grouse near Tring (Parish of Buckland). We were
shooting pheasants, and the Sand-Grouse rose out of a turnip
field.
SHAG (Phalacrocorax graculus).
On October 22nd, 1908, a Shag, the first recorded for
Hertfordshire, was shot on Tring reservoirs.
BrrrERN (Botaurus stellaris).
A Bittern stayed on the reservoir for ten davs, but left last
week (January 14th, 1909). It allowed a keeper to stand
watching it within three yards for some time.
BLACK-NECKED GREBE (Podicipes nigricollis).
A female and a young male were shot on Tring reservoirs
on November 2lst and 24th, 1908. A female was shot on
November 24th, 1903. L. W. Boruscumn.
SONG-THRUSH’S NEST IN DECEMBER.
On December 17th, 1908, a Song-Thrush’s nest containing
two newly-laid eggs was found at Forton, near Lancaster.
H. W. Rosryson.
510 BRITISH BIRDS.
EVERSMANN’S WARBLER (PHYLILOSCOPUS
BOREALIS) AT FAIR ISLE.
A NEW BRITISH BIRD.
On September 28th, 1908, while Mr. W. Eagle Clarke was
pursuing his investigations (frequently referred to in these
pages) of the migration of birds at Fair Isle, he put up out of
a patch of potatoes a dark-coloured Willow-Warbler, which
he at once suspected belonged to a species he had never seen
before. He was fortunate enough to secure the bird, which
proved to be an undoubted example of Eversmann’s Warbler
(Phylloscopus borealis), a species which has not previously
been detected as occurring in the British Isles. This species
has only once before occurred in Western Europe, viz., at
Heligoland on October 6th, 1854. It summers in Finmark,
Northern Russia and Siberia, and winters in Burma, Malaya,
China, etc., and, as Mr. Clarke remarks, it would be interesting
to know where the European contingent passes the winter,
‘‘for it is difficult to believe that there are no winter retreats
for this species nearer than the eastern sections of Southern
Asia ”’ (ef. Ann..S.N.H., 1909, pp. 1 and 2).
LITTLE OWL IN HAMPSHIRE.
HAvING seen the article on the spreading of the Little Owl
in British Birps, I thought it worth while to send you a
record of one being shot near Petersfield, Hants, on December
26th, 1908. While driving one of the hangers it dashed out
from amongst some thick ivy bushes, and was shot by a friend
who mistook it for a Woodcock or large Snipe.
A. W. MARRIAGE.
MONTAGU’S HARRIER IN IRELAND.
A Montacu’s HARRIER (Circus eruginosus) in immature plumage
was shot about September 10th, 1901, at Castle Flemyng,
Queen's co. My informant is the owner of the specimen, on
whose estate it was shot. It has not hitherto been specially
recorded in print, but it makes the eleventh occurrence of
this bird in Ireland, to which I allude in my “ List of Irish
Birds” (p. 27). All the other examples have been taken in
or near the co. Wicklow (cf. antea, Vol. I., p. 318).
R. J. UssHER.
ICELAND FALCON IN SCOTLAND.
A FEMALE (? adult) Iceland Falcon (Falco islandicus) was
received by me in the flesh on December 19th, 1908. It was
NOTES. 311
killed some ten days earlier on or near Callanish Light,
Flannan Isles, by Stornoway, Lewis, N.B.
FRED. SMALLEY.
FOOD OF THE RED-BREASTED MERGANSER.
On November 27th, 1908, on dissecting a Red-breasted
Merganser drake (Mergus serrator) I found in the crop a small
round crab a little larger than a shilling, and in the gizzard
two more crabs of the same size, one whole and the other
slightly digested. Besides these there were two or three claws,
one being that of a much larger crab, and the ground-up
remains of a number of crab-shells. There was also some
flesh in all stages of digestion, most of which was that of crab,
but the more digested pieces were difficult to determine,
although I think they were crab, as there was no trace of
fish-bones whatever. The absence of fish remains was all
the more interesting as the bird was shot off a shore swarming
with coal-fish fry.
H. W. Rosrnson.
SMEW IN MONTGOMERYSHIRE.
On January Ist I received for identification from Churchstoke
a young male Smew, which had been shot there the previous
day. It is the first ever recorded in the county of Montgomery.
A similar bird was shot near Shrewsbury just a week earlier.
As the Smew has occurred over a dozen times in Shropshire,
it must almost certainly have visited the neighbouring county
of Montgomery, but has hitherto apparently escaped notice.
HH. . ForRREst.
RED VARIETY (P. MONTANA) OF THE COMMON
PARTRIDGE.
WiruH reference to Mr. W. P. Pycraft’s description of the
remarkable variety of Red-legged Partridge (Caccabis rufa)
killed this season in Essex (cf. antea, p. 240), it is perhaps in-
teresting to record the two somewhat similarly marked
varieties of the Common Partridge (Perdix cinerea) in the
possession of Lord Forester. These birds were killed a
number of years ago on the Willey Park Estate, near Broseley,
Salop, and it is believed that they were both shot from the
same covey. The two birds are very much alike, and a des-
eription of one will perhaps suffice. The lower neck, breast
and flanks—indeed all the underparts save the centre of the
belly—are of a uniform chestnut-brown; the back and wing-
coverts are also abnormal, these parts being profusely, and
5312 BRITISH BIRDS.
more or less evenly, blotched with dark brown. The rest of
the plumage is of normal coloration, but, owing to long ex-
posure to the light, both specimens are sadly faded.
C. INGRAM.
[Mr. Ingram kindly forwarded us an accurately coloured
sketch of the bird in question, and this we have submitted to
Mr. J. H. Gurney, who has for some years taken a great
interest in this variety of the Partridge, which persistently
recurs in Norfolk. Mr. Gurney writes as follows :—
‘* On comparing Mr. Ingram’s coloured sketch with a good
example of the Perdix montana of Brisson (Orn., I., p. 224),
killed a few years ago in Norfolk, it appears certainly to re-
present an immature but faded example of that variety. This
singular race or breed seems to be best described as an
erythrism, or abnormal replacement of the natural colours by
red.’’]
THE AVERAGE WEIGHT OF SNIPE.
THE average weight of ninety Snipe shot in Shetland, as
given on p. 267, Vol. II., seems to suggest that they must
have been specially selected specimens, or at least secured
during a specially favourable season. It would have been
interesting had you given the date and time of year when the
ninety 5°78 oz. Snipe were secured in Shetland. Most careful
and accurate statistics, taken by a friend of mine in Orkney
during September, October, and November, 1908, work out at
4:15 oz. for 1679 Common, and 2°24 oz. for 328 Jack Snipe.
Maurice C. H. Brrp.
[The weights given by Mr. Haldane were quoted because
they were above the usually accepted average. Saunders
(Manual, p. 574) gives the average weight of the Common
Snipe as 4 ozs.: Mr. Harting (Handbook, p. 200) 4 to 43 ozs.
In the note quoted Mr. Haldane suggests that the heavy
weight of the Shetland Snipe and Woodcock might be due
to the fact that food is always plentiful, and that the weather
is usually open. In reply to the Rev. Bird’s questions, Mr.
Haldane kindly writes that he has re-read his note in the
‘‘ Annals,” and agrees with all he there stated. As corrobora-
tion he gives the following weights, taken at random from his
diary :—‘‘ Dec. 22, 1904, 4 Snipe, 63, 63, 6, 7 ozs. One day
in December three Snipe, 6, 7, 70zs. Dec. 27, 1901, eleven
Woodcock weighed an average of 13°6 ozs., the lightest being
12 and the heaviest 163 ozs.” Mr. Haldane adds :—‘‘ About
the end of November and December they seem to attain their .
greatest weight. I never pick birds, but have them weighed
as they come in. I know nothing about Orkney. The two
groups of islands are quite unlike.”—EDs. |
NOTES. 51
POMATORHINE SKUA IN LANCASHIRE.
AN adult female Pomatorhine Skua (Stercorarius pomatorhinus)
was killed with a stone near Cockersand Light, Lancashire, on
November 28th, 1908.
I may also mention that an adult male was shot near
Graemsay Lighthouse, Orkney, on November 4th, and an
immature male at Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, on November
17th. FRED. SMALLEY.
TWO NORFOLK LEVANTINE SHEARWATERS.
Mr. H. N. Pasuuey, of Cley, Norfolk, has kindly sent me
word of two Levantine Shearwaters which were shot by
George Long (a local wildfowler) on September 22nd, 1891,
on the bar at Blakeney. One of these birds is in the collection
of Mr. E. M. Connop, of Wroxham, who permits me to record
it, and the other is in the collection of Mr. Percy Evershed,
of Norwich, and both have been examined by Mr. T.
Southwell. Mr. Pashley states that both birds were seen by
Howard Saunders and Lt.-Col. H. W. Feilden, and were
pronounced by the former to be true Levantines. It may
have been due to a slip that they were not referred to in the
second edition of the ‘‘ Manual,” but in any case their history
and identification seem perfectly satisfactory.
H. F. WrrHersy.
Buack REDSTART IN THE OUTER HEBRIDES AND IN FIFE.—
On November 6th, 1908, the Duchess of Bedford saw a speci-
men of Ruticilla titys, a scarce visitor to Scotland, on South
Uist (Ann. S.N.H., 1909, p. 4). On October 22nd, 1908, a
fine male was seen at Balcomie, Fife, by the Misses Rintoul
and Baxter (t.c., p. 49).
GARDEN-WARBLER AT SULE-SKERRY (N.W. of Orkney).—
On September 22nd, 1908, a specimen of Sylvia hortensis was
taken at the Sule-Skerry Lighthouse (W. Eagle Clarke, Ann.
S.N.H., 1909, p. 48).
RED-BREASTED FLYCATCHER IN BARRA, AND AT THE BuTT
oF Lrewis.—On November 3rd, 1908, while at Barra, the
Duchess of Bedford saw a small brown bird which, coming
well into view, was seen to have the basal half of the tail
white with the exception of the centre feathers, which were
dark. It thus became clear that the bird was either a
female or young male Muscicapa parva (Ann. S.N.H.,
1909, p. 3). Although of late years Mr. Eagle Clarke
has recorded several of these birds from Fair Isle, only
two other instances (one at the Monarch Lighthouse
in 1893, and the other at the Bell Rock on October 25th,
1907) of its occurrence in Scotland were known. Mr. Robert
Clyne, who obtained the bird at the Bell Rock, now writes
ee)
514 BRITISH BIRDS.
that he is certain he saw a bird of the same species on
November Ist, 1908, on the cliff edge at the Butt of Lewis,
where he is now stationed (t.c., p. 48).
HawFINCH IN SUMMER IN East Lorutan.—The Rev.
H. N. Bonar records that an immature male Coccothraustes
vulgaris was found dead at Tyneholm, Pencaitland, on July 3rd,
1908 (Ann. S.N.H., 1909, p. 48). For Scottish breeding
records, see antea, Vol. I., p. 151.
LittLe Buntine at SuLe-SkerRy (N.W. of Orkney).—
On September 22nd, 1908, a specimen of Emberiza pusilla was
taken at the Sule-Skerry Lighthouse (W. Eagle Clarke, Ann.
SNH. 1909: p. 48).
WHITE-TAILED HAGLE IN HEREFORD.—Mr. H. E. Forrest
writes that a male ‘‘ four-year-old White-tailed Eagle was shot
near Hereford on December 31st, 1908, and is being preserved
for the Hereford Museum.”
Honey-Buzzarps In Eneuanp.—Mr. F. Smalley kindly
informs us that the specimen of Pernis apivorus mentioned
in our last number (p. 283) as having been shot near Beccles,
Norfolk, was obtained on September 23rd, and was in dark
chocolate-coloured plumage. Mr. H. E. Forrest writes that
specimens were shot at Ashbourne (Derbyshire) on
September 10th, near Cardigan on September 24th, and
near Tamworth on September 30th. One was shot near
Carlisle on October 23rd, 1908 (L. E. Hope, Nat., 1909, p. 30).
THE STONE-CURLEW IN YORKSHIRE.—In an _ interesting
article (Nat., 1909, pp. 11-16) Mr. E. W. Wade deplores the
fact that the Stone-Curlew, once so plentiful in Yorkshire,
now barely exists in two districts only—one in the North
Riding and the other on the wolds. Cultivation of what was
once “‘ waste’ land or warren, is responsible for the banish-
ment of the bird, and although there is great danger of their
extinction in the county owing to their present very small
numbers, there should be good hope for them on account
of their well-known persistence in returning to ancient
breeding haunts, however changed. Moreover, the culti-
vation of the wolds “appears to have reached its highest
point.”” Mr. Wade confirms Mr. Meade-Waldo’s observation
of the incubation period, viz., 26-27 days (cf. antea, Vol. L.,
ps 92):
BLACK-NECKED GREBE ON THE SoLway.—A female speci-
men of Podicipes nigricollis in winter dress, but showing traces
of nuptial dress on the neck and cheeks, was shot at Bowness
on the Solway on December 3rd, 1908. The species rarely
occurs on the Solway (L. E. Hope, Nat., 1909, p. 30).
i)
al:
mins Sm
ERE My i iy
as ae 4 eiziale
The Food of Some British Birds. By Robert Newstead, M.Sc.,
A.L.S., &c. Supplement to the Journal of the Board of
Agriculture. December, 1908. Price 4d.
WE are glad to find that the Board of Agriculture is at last
beginning to realize the importance of the study of Economic
Ornithology, for the Report they have just issued does credit
alike to the author and the authorities under whose auspices
it is published.
Before proceeding to indicate the scope of Mr. Newstead’s
careful and valuable work, we may say that if there is one
thing more than another which it serves to demonstrate, it is
this—that his conclusions are of local value only; and Mr.
Newstead, probably more than anyone else, would be the first
to insist on this. But his work, we trust, will be taken as a
model to be followed in every county throughout these
islands ; then, and not till then, shall we be in a position to
draw reliable data from the facts collected, whereon to base
legislation, or to adopt measures for the control of any given
Species in any particular area. The conclusions which Mr.
Newstead has drawn from his study of the food of birds in
the county of Chester, for example, will not apply with equal
truth in, say, a fruit-growing county.
Mr. Newstead’s paper contains the results only of some
871 post-mortem examinations of birds representing 128 species,
some of which are but rare visitants, such as the Hoopoe,
Waxwing, Bittern, and Crane; while in the case of many
common species he has examined but a single stomach.
In the first eighteen pages of this Report he gives a general
summary of his work, which has extended over the last twenty
years, concluding this section with a few brief generalizations
as to the relative value of our commoner British birds, in
relation to the farmer and gardener, and though we agree in
the main with his summary, we feel that in some cases his
condemnation of certain species is premature and based on
insufficient evidence.
The Blackbird, Bullfinch, Sparrow-Hawk, and Raven he
brands as ‘“‘ doubtfully of any utility,’ while the Carrion Crow,
House-Sparrow, and Wood-Pigeon are ‘‘ species which are
wholly destructive and useless.”” At any rate, of the last-
named it may be said that it is good to eat, and, therefore,
not useless.
316 BRITISH BIRDS.
Of many fish-eating birds, such as the Kingfisher, Auks,
and so on, he gives no particulars as to the kind of fish eaten,
apparently because their remains were too fragmentary to
make identification possible. But this is not necessarily so,
for most, if not all, of these fish could have been identified by
means of the ‘‘ otoliths,”’ or ear-bones.
Of some other birds his findings are curiously interesting.
Thus an analysis of the stomachs of four Common Snipe
yielded seeds, grass, fragments of beetles, and small land
shells! while five Jack Snipe gave similar results. The only
Woodcock examined contained an earwig, a beetle, and a
little sand !
Of the Black-headed Gull we are glad to note he remarks :—
‘‘ Fortunately the birds were, and are still, strictly protected
in this area (Chester).”’ And this because, among other
things, it devours enormous numbers of crane-flies, and their
larvee—‘‘ leather jackets.”’ During the plague of these insects,
which devastated the Dee Marshes in 1901, these Gulls
gathered in hundreds to the feast, and gorged themselves so
completely that the pellets, or castings, thrown up were left,
scattered over the land, ‘“‘ looking like little bundles of dead
grass”!
Mr. Newstead is to be congratulated on his work, which, so
far as it goes, is excellent ; but what is wanted is an exhaustive
analysis of a larger number of the commoner species of our
native birds continued through every month of the year,
including the nesting season, for our knowledge of the food
of nesting birds is peculiarly meagre. And this work, to be
convincing, must be carried on by experts, and with scrupulous
accuracy and attention to details. Results obtained at hap-
hazard, and from a single example of any given species, are
practically useless.—W.P.P.
ANILUSTRATED: MAGAZINE
DEVOTEDTOTHEDBIRDS ON
Se THEBRUISHUST
FLV LGA
CHi
a
bE B 3809
As eee
-DALLMEYER’S:
| Naturalists’ Camera,
1907, MODEL,
; For Telephoto or Ordinary LENSES.
DALUMEYER’S ©
Lenses are used
by the most
skilled Bird
Photographers.
The following are
specially vecomniended :
THE STIGMATIC SERIES IL. F/6 (Convertible.)
THE SERIES D PATENT PORTRAIT LENSES F 6.
(A Rapid Lone Focus Lens at a Moderate Price.)
High or Moderate Power Telephoto Lenses (Original Make).
We are Specialists in Cameras and A pparatus us for er eter tees
CATALOGUES AND ADVICE FREE.
J. H. DALLMEYER, Limitep, benziL ro.,
Showrooms: 25, NEWMAN ah Ww. NEASDEN, LONDON, NW.
JUST ARRIVED.
A collection of Birds from Mount Ruwenzori, East Africa,
including Cryptolopha alpina, Néctarinia dartmouthi, Cinnyris stuhimanni,
Anthus leggei, and other rarities, many of which have not appeared in any “A
previous lists.
For Particulars apply to—
W. F. H. ROSENBERG,
Naturalist. and Importer of Zoological Collections,
57, HAVERSTOCK HILL, LONDON, N.W.
Price Lists of Birdskins and Eggs post free on Application.
WATKINS & DONCASTER,
Waturalists,
And Manufacturers of CABINETS and APPARATUS for Entomology, Birds’ Eas iy
and Skins, and all Branches of Natural History.
A LARGE STOCK OF INSECTS, and BIRDS’ EGGS and SKINS.
Speciality :—Objects for Nature Study, Drawing Classes, &c.
BIRDS, MAMMALS, &c., PRESERVED and MOUNTED by FIRST-CLASS WORKMER ‘
TRUE TO NATURE.
All Books and Publications on’ Natural History supplied.
86, STRAND, LONDON, W.C. (Five Doors from Charing sia
~ Catalogue (102, PP.) post free.
*
io. -
he!
.
ut
ay ds
iv ;
Q9
oe Cp
ek
‘
os ei yi
7 rf a M OT ¥
Rael wai,
ua Cc a
7 A ee
_@ureygqesy KajxQ Aq paydesgojoyd)
‘TUIHSHUOX ‘NUNdG ‘ISHN AHL NO NYG], WILLUT
(LZ Id “Il ‘1°A ‘SAYId HSILIAd)
DNHDSHIBIRDS
BOLTED eByY “FS WITHERBY ZS; M.B.0O.U.
ASSISTED BY W. P. PYCRAFT, A.LS., M.B.0.U.
ContTENTS OF NumBER 10, Vou. II. Marcu 1, 1909.
The Colony of Little Terns at Spurn Point, Yorkshire,
by Oxley Grabham, M.A., M.B.o.u. (Plate VII.) .. Page 317
On a Plan of Mapping Migratory Birds in their Nesting
Areas, by C. J. and H. G. Alexander .. : 322
On the More Important Additions to our ineticde he
British Birds since 1899, by H. F. Witherby and N. F.
Ticehurst. Part XVIII.—(continued from page 308) .. 327
On the Eggs of the Tree- ra ba Se i. Seo E.Z.S.;
M.B.O.U. i 335
Notes :—The iblse raphe ot British Birds. (Ghonbaies
Legislation for the Protection of Birds. The British
Song-Thrush and Dartford Warbler (Eds.). Northern
Willow-Wren in Norfolk (Clifford Borrer and H. F.
Witherby). Lesser Spotted Woodpecker Breeding in
Merioneth (H. E. Forrest). _Hoopoe in Merioneth (H. E.
Forrest). Little Owlin Warwickshire and Worcestershire
(F. Coburn) The Food of the Common Hider. (H. W.
Robinson). Velvet-Scoter in Shropshire (H. E. Forrest).
Increase of Wood-Pigeons in Orkney (Rev. James R.
Hale). Red Variety (P. montana) of the Common
Partridge (H. E. Forrest). Short Notes ne os 340
THE COLONY OF LITTLE TERNS AT SPURN
POINT, YORKSHIRE.
BY
OXLEY GRABHAM, m.a., m.z.o.v.
(Pearse VIT.)
I po not propose to enter here into the peculiarities of
the Little Tern (Sterna minuta) in general, but merely to
give a few facts relative to the last Yorkshire breeding
colony, which at present is, | am glad to say, in a
flourishing condition. Spurn Point, at the mouth of the
318 BRITISH BIRDS.
Humber, is an isolated spit of land, bordered on one side
by the North Sea and on the other by the vast mud-
flats of the Humber. It has been a happy hunting
ground of mine for many years, in autumn and winter,
wild-fowling along the river and coast and in the
marshes, and spending nights in the lighthouse to view
the enormous flocks of birds that pass on migration, and
in the summer watching and photographing the Little
Terns and other birds that breed there.
The Little Terns have bred there as long as living
Fic. 1.—The Eggs in a Slight Scoop on Fine Sand.
(Photographed by Oxley Grabham.)
memory goes back, and doubtless for a great many years
before ; but a decade or so ago the birds were in danger
of extinction owing to the raids made upon them by
collectors, and also owing to the thoughtlessness of
excursionists who used to pick up the eggs and throw
them at one another for fun!! We did not mind anyone
taking a clutch of eggs for scientific purposes, but this
sort of thing was too much, and so a few of us, with Mr. W.
H. St. Quintin, of Scampston, at our head (than whom no
one living has done more to preserve the birds of our
O. GRABHAM: COLONY OF LITTLE TERNS. 319
county that needed protection), subscribed together
and put on a watcher. We also received great assistance
from Mr. Consett Hopper, Mr. J. W. Webster, the light-
house keepers, and others who live at the Point. Things
had got so bad that the colony had dwindled to about a
dozen pairs, and these few were so harried and disturbed
_that they hardly ever came near their eggs during the
daytime, and had to trust to the heat of the sun and the
sand, only settling down when night fell.
The birds arrive at their breeding grounds almost
Fic. 2.—Newly-Hatched Young.
(Photographed by Oxley Grabham.)
to a day at the end of April. In the cold spring of 1907
they did not appear till May Ist, the latest date that
Robinson, our watcher, has ever known, and most of them
leave at the end of August. They sit on their eggs for
about seventeen days, and the young can toddle away
as soon as they are out of the shell, which the old birds
remove at once. I have noticed two types of chicks:
one much yellower than the other. High tides often do
much damage to the eggs, which are placed too near the
320 BRITISH BIRDS.
ordinary high-water mark. But Robinson, if he scents
danger, moves the eggs a considerable distance inshore,
and the birds easily find them. If the first clutch be
destroyed the Little Terns always lay again, and occasion-
ally even when they have hatched off one clutch they
will lay again. Sometimes just at hatching time we
have had two or three days of very cold rough weather,
and then I have seen the poor little chicks, just out of
the shell, huddling together under the lee of a big stone,
an old boot, piece of wood, or any flotsam and jetsam
Fic. 3.—Little Tern calling to her Mate.
(Photographed by Oxley Grabham.)
washed ashore by the sea that will afford them protection
and at such times a few always succumb to exposure.
But, as a rule, there is very little mortality amongst
either the old or young birds, if the weather is propitious.
They have few natural enemies here, and their eggs are
very fertile—one seldom comes across a bad one. The
young are fed largely on very small plaice about the size
of a penny, sand-eels, sprats, etc. During 1908 between
fifty and sixty pairs of birds bred here, and in spite of
some very cold weather, just at hatching time, a good
O. GRABHAM: COLONY OF LITTLE TERNS. 321
percentage of young arrived at maturity. There is
nothing peculiar to this particular colony in the nests of
eggs. The usual clutch is two, occasionally three, and
rarely I have found four. Owing to the drifting sand-
storms to which this coast is exposed, the eggs frequently
get covered up to the depth of several inches, but the old
birds almost invariably scratch them out again, and
make all right.
In connection with our Spurn colony one further item
of interest may be mentioned. The late John Cordeaux,
Fic. 4.—Little Tern on the Nest.
(Photographed by Oxley Grabham.)
who took a very great interest in the birds of the Humber,
told me that a good many years ago he sent some eggs
of the Little Tern—as this species is wanting in those
otherwise Tern-favoured islets—to the Farne Islands.
They were put in the nests of the Common and Arctic
Terns, but although they hatched out all right, and
eventually went away with their foster-parents, they
never returned to the scenes of their youth; and so the
attempts to introduce this pretty little species into the
Farnes resulted in failure.
( 322)
ON A PLAN OF MAPPING MIGRATORY BIRDS
IN THEIR NESTING AREAS.
BY
C. J. anp H. G. ALEXANDER.
AFTER some years’ observation of the birds in the
neighbourhood of Tunbridge Wells, we came to the
conclusion that in many species each pair inhabits a
definite area, into which other pairs do not intrude. In
the spring of 1907, therefore, we decided to mark in the
positions of these pairs on 6 in. Ordnance Survey Maps.
In that summer we mapped a considerable area round
Tunbridge Wells, while in the summer of 1908 we
increased this area, and also began mapping at Wye
(near Ashford).
In placing a pair of birds on the map we generally relied
on the singing of the male, though in many cases we saw
the female as well, and occasionally found the nest. In
the migratory species of the J’urdide most individuals
sing persistently from their arrival (provided the weather
is suitable) to the time of pairing, less during the time
of nest-building, again more while the females are
sitting, and less after the young are hatched. A Chiff-
chaff at Wye apparently did not sing at all after it
began to build, and from this extreme all gradations
occur up to individuals which sing nearly as much all
through the rest of the song-period as just after their
arrival. |
When a bird of any migratory species appears at a
place on one day and is gone again on the next, it is
safe to assume that it is only on its way to its own
breeding-ground. Of such individuals we only see a
very few, both of species which breed in our districts,
and of species such as the Ring-Ouzel, Greenland Wheat-
ear, Redstart, and Common Sandpiper, which do not;
the only occasion on which we have seen any number
PLAN OF MAPPING MIGRATORY BIRDS. 328
was at Wye on April 23rd, 1908 (the day before the
snow), when seven passing Willow-Wrens were observed
where only eighteen local ones had arrived.
The method of arrival which we have observed in these
two districts agrees with what has been made clear in
the “B.O.C. Migration Reports,” namely, that each
migratory “wave” drops a few individuals of a species
in a district. Thus the filling of these two districts
with any one species takes several weeks. In 1908,
for instance, the first male Chiffchaff belonging to the
Tunbridge Wells district was seen on March 30th, while
another of the Chiffchaffs of the district did not arrive
until about April 30th; some Willow-Wrens at Wye
did not arrive until after May 4th; two Tree-Pipits
arrived near Tunbridge Wells on April 11th, while some
did not come until early May ; and one Blackcap reached
the same district on April 10th, others not until the
beginning of May.
So far as we have been able to judge, certain males
are habitually among the earliest, others among the
later, arrivals. |
The males inhabiting one small district (such as a wood,
or stream valley) often appear to arrive together. In the
case of such a district which contained several pairs of a
particular species in 1907, but none in 1908, we conclude
that the males were travelling together and were overtaken
by some calamity. At Tunbridge Wells, the only five
Willow-Wrens of a district known as Bishopsdown, and
three Chiffchaffs close together near Langton, were
absent in 1908, and at Wye three Sedge-Warblers, which
had inhabited a part of the river for at least three seasons,
likewise did not appear in 1908.
The females seem to be always a few days behind the
males, and we have observed the curious fact that those
males which arrive first are first joined by the females,
so that an early pair may be building before the male of
a late pair has arrived. This suggests to us that the same
female returns to the haunt of its mate year after year.
524 BRITISH BIRDS.
The young seem to disappear earlier than their parents
in most species, the Red-backed Shrike being an ex-
ception. In those species in which the sexes are alike,
and in which the males do not sing in the autumn, we
cannot tell which sex leaves first. Im the case of the
Chiffchaff the males are the last to leave; a pair of
Whinchats left together in 1908 between September
30th and October Ist; the last two Blackcaps seen in
1908 were females, but there is a possibility that these
were merely passing.
It seems that certain individuals habitually stay
latest, just as certain ones habitually come earliest. We
have not been able to detect any correlation between
early arrival and late departure.
Our mapping also provides a census of certain species
in the two districts, and shows the variation in numbers
from year to year. It will be seen in the subjoined table
that the numbers in 1908 were practically the same as
those in 1907, except in the Chiffchaff and Red-backed
Shrike, which show considerable losses. In almost all
cases the losses appear slightly greater than the gains,
but this is probably due to the fact, that it is easier to be
sure that a bird which certainly was here last year, is
not here this year, than to be sure that one which is here |
this year was not overlooked last year. The minus
number in 1908 compared with the 1907 number gives
the proportional loss on migration of the adult males,
and hence their length of life; but it would not be safe
to work this out on one season’s difference.
What becomes of young birds we cannot pretend to
say ; the individuals shown in the plus number in 1908
are presumably young of the previous year. We have
occasionally found two males of a species arrived at the
same place and singing at one another. Eventually, as
with Robins in the autumn, one has disappeared, or else
has settled in an unoccupied place near by.
The observations of only two years are insufficient to
form a basis for definite conclusions in all cases, but in
Explanation.
N. Nightingale.
Wh. Whitethroat.
Lesser White-
throat.
. Blackcap.
Garden- Warbler
Chiffchaff.
Willow-Wren.
Wood-Wren.
Tree-Pipit.
Red-backed
Shrike
Spotted Fly-
catcher.
Wryneck.
Each square represents
a pair of Birds.
MAS
hte, Mo} o>
My, Se
Mie,
Me a
“ a
Thi
‘ wh, 7% -a
weirs
N
N\
7
aA
B PZ Wasi
Z| “4a A Se
ba 2 \
—— \
Map SHEWING SOME OF THE MIGRANTS IN PART
OF THE BorouGH oF TUNBRIDGE WELLS.
(Six inches equals one mile).
526
BRITISH BIRDS.
this article we have given some of the results, as well as
an idea of what may be the outcome of more complete
observations on these lines.
TABLE showing the difference in number of pairs of certain
migrants at Tunbridge Wells between 1907 and 1908, and the
total number of pairs of migrants mapped in a larger district
at Tunbridge Wells and in a district at Wye in 1908.
Number of
| pairs in
1907.
Wheatear Q-;
Whinchat 0
Stonechat 3
Nightingale +
Whitethroat ells 2
Lesser Whitethroat) 15
Blackeap .. Par Ve
Garden-Warbler..| 13
Chiffchaff . . ; 42
Willow-Wren |. 123
Wood-Wren |
Grey Wagtail 0
Tree- Pipit 38
Red-backed Shrike. 7
Spotted Balad 18
Wryneck . be 9 BO
Corncrake | 0
Difference
in 1908.
0
0
ea
—!]
—3
419-4
so
—4
om ees
ee iy |
0) |
4]
a ee
Bes:
me pee:
8p
Be |
Number of
pairs in 8
sq. miles at
Tunbridge
Wells
(1908).
Number of
pairs in
4 sq. miles
at Wye
(1908).
* Not present in 1907.
ON THE MORE IMPORTANT ADDITIONS TO OUR
KNOWLEDGE OF BRITISH BIRDS SINCE 1899.
BY
Peat “WITHERBY anpwN. FF) TICHAURST.
Part XVIII.
(Continued from page 308.)
SABINE’S GULL Xema sabinii (Sab.). 8S. page 657.
Immature birds appear to occur almost regularly in autumn
on the Norfolk coast, while occurrences have been recorded
of recent years from Cornwall, Somerset, Yorkshire, Derby,
and Hants. An adult bird was shot near Rye, Sussex, on
October 20th, 1891. (N. F. T.)
ScoTLanp.—Skerryvore.—One immature bird on February
10th, 1905, and one on November 30th, 1907 (Ann. S.N.H.,
1906, p. 202, and 1908, p. 205). Argyllshire —An immature
bird received for preservation on October 30th, 1903, from
Easdale (C. H. Bisshop, t.c., 1904, p. 57).
The breeding of this species on Spitzbergen has now been
proved beyond doubt by the discovery in 1907 by Professor
Konig’s expedition of a nest with two eggs, from which the
parent birds were shot (F. C. R. Jourdain in litt.).
WEDGE-TAILED GULL Shodostethia rosea Macgill.
S. page 659.
Nesting Habits—In the delta of the Kolyma River, N.E.
Siberia, it was found breeding numerously by Mr. 8. A.
Buturlin in 1905. Though snow was still deep, and the ice
had only just broken up on the river, incubated eggs were
found on June 13th. The birds nest in small colonies of ten
to fifteen pairs. Early in July young in down were found.
The eggs, young in down, and young in first plumage, are fully
described (Ibis, 1906, pp. 131-139, 333-337, 610, and Pl. XX.
(egos), 661-666, 1907, Pl. XII. (young in down)).
LITTLE GULL Larus minutus Pall. 8S. page 663.
This species being of fairly regular occurrence on the east.
and south-east coasts of England, and especially so on the
Norfolk coast and the east coast of Scotland in autumn and
winter, we have not quoted the records.
328 BRITISH BIRDS.
Scitty IsLEs.—One was shot on St. Mary’s in December,
1905 (J. Clark, Zool., 1906, p. 343).
CoRNWALL.—One was obtained at Swan Cove in November,
1904 (J. Clark, ¢.c., 1907, p. 287).
CHESHIRE. — One (apparently adult) seen on December
26th, 1902, on the Manchester Ship Canal (T. A. Coward,
t.c., 1903, p. 172). One seen flying round the ‘“ Conway,”
on December 16th, 1903 (F. C. R. Jourdain, t.c., 1904, p. 193).
NortH WaeEs.—One in 1898 and two in 1901 are
mentioned (H. EK. Forrest, Vert. F. N. Wales, p. 379).
SHETLAND.—One at Nyra Sound, May 3rd, 1904 (T. E.
Saxby, é.c., 1904, p. 230).
[IRELAND.—One was seen by “G. W.” on the coast of
Connaught on several days between July 13th and August
25th, 1906, in company with a number of Black-headed Gulls
(Field, 13, x., 06, p. 650).]
Has recently been found breeding in the Ringkjébing Fjord,
Denmark (vide Field, 17, x11., 04, and 23, xmz., 05; and Vid.
Med. nat. For. Kbhvn., 1905, p. 245), and also at Rossitten in
Kast Prussia (J.f.0., 1903, p. 186), thus it seems to be extending
its range westw ard.
MEDITERRANEAN BLACK-HEADED GULL Larus
melanocephalus Natt. 8S. page 667.
YORKSHIRE.—An adult in winter plumage was obtained
on the Yorkshire coast in November, 1895. No further
details are permitted by the owner (T. H. Nelson, birds of
Yorks., p. 675).
[CoRNWALL.—Iwo examples, stated in a manuscript cata-
logue by Harry Shaw to have been killed near Falmouth in
March, 1851, are now in the possession of Mr. Beville Stanier,
of Peplow Hall, Salop (H. E. Forrest, Zool., 1907, p. 33).]
YELLOW-LEGGED HERRING-GULL Larus cachinnans
Pall. S. page 674.
[One was seen in Dover Harbour on April 18th, 1904, amongst
some other Herring-Gulls, and came close enough for its
orange-coloured legs to be noticed (N. C. Rothschild, Bull.
BOG, DAV. pas
GLAUCOUS GULL Larus glaucus O. Fab. S. page 679.
This species occurs so frequently in Scotland and on the
coasts of England as not to require special mention.
IRELAND.—One seen on January Ist, 1901, and an immature
bird obtained on February 14th, 1905, at Moyview, co. Sligo
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 329
(R. Warren, Irish Nat., 1905, p. 71), and an immature bird
was shot on Rathlin Island on February 19th, 1907 (W. C.
Wright, t.c., 1907, p. 224). One was found dead at Bartragh
Island on December 8th, 1906 (R. Warren, Zool., 1907, p. 73).
OrKNEY.—December 25th—26th, 1901, “ over fifty, mostly
adult birds; never saw more than four at a time before ”’
(AnnoOs.N ., 1902, p: 197).
ICELAND GULL Larus leucopterus Faber. S. page 681.
Winter occurrences of this species are too frequent to require
special notice.
Late Dates——One was seen from April 30th to May 2nd,
1903, and another on May 17th, 1904, in Mull (D. Macdonald,
Ann. S.N.H., 1904, p. 247). One was seen on April 7th,
1902, at Londonderry (D. C. Campbell, Irish Nat., 1902, p.
151). One was shot on April 26th, 1905, in the Moy Estuary
(R. Warren, t.c., 1905, p. 135).
IVORY GULL Pagophila eburnea (Phipps). S. page 685
YORKSHIRE.—One was seen at Flamborough on April 5th,
1904, and was ultimately obtained (T. H. Nelson, Birds of
Yorks., p. 694).
NoRTHAMPTONSHIRE.—A bird in immature plumage was
shot at Weston-by-Weedon on or about February 7th, 1901
(O. V. Aplin, /bzs, 1901, p. 517).
CoRNWALL.—I'wo were seen, and one (adult male) was shot
in the Hayle Estuary on January 24th, 1907 (J. Clark, Zool.,
1907; p. 287):
ScortanpD.—In January, 1890, the first from the Outer
Hebrides was obtained at Stornoway (J. A. Harvie-Brown,
Ann. S.N.H., 1903, p. 16). Early in February, 1901, one
was obtained at Broadford, Skye (T. E. Buckley, ¢.c., 1901,
p- 116). One was identified on a close view at Largo Bay,
Fifeshire, on September 14th, 1904 (L. J. Rintoul and E. V.
Baxter, t.c., 1905, p. 53). One was seen “lately” (spring,
1906) in North Uist (N. B. Kinnear, t.c., 1907, p. 85).
IRELAND.—The third specimen for Ireland was shot at
Belmullet on March 27th, 1905 (R. J. Ussher, List of Irish
Birds, p. 50).
GREAT SKUA WMegalestris catarrhactes (L.). S. page 687.
Hants.—One was picked up dead at Lainston, in March,
1904 (Birds of Hants, p. 339).
Kent.—A female was shot on Dungeness on October 4th,
1900 (W. R. Butterfield, Zool., 1900, p. 521).
330 BRITISH BIRDS.
NorFoLtk.—Five were seen on the coast by Mr. Long on
August 31st, 1899. Only once before been seen so early,
October being the usual time (J. H. Gurney, t.c., 1900,
o. 109).
LINCOLNSHIRE.—A bird, probably of this species, was seen
off Donna Nook, on September 21st, 1901 (G. H. Caton Haigh,
bc., VOOZ, qo. daz):
Yorxks.—One was shot near Robin Hood’s Bay on June
29th, 1904 (W. J. Clarke, t.c., 1905, p. 74). One was obtained
at Bridlington in the autumn of 1904 (Birds of Yorks., p.
696).
ScotLanp.—Fair Isle-—The natives assured Mr. W. Eagle
Clarke that they had it from their fathers that the “ Bonxie”’
long ago bred on the island (Ann. S.N.H., 1906, p. 78).
Shetland.—* Has increased in numbers... . there being
at least eighty-four birds on this island ”’ [Unst] (T. E. Saxby,
Zool., 1901, p. 391). Twenty-one nests at Hermaness in 1901
(Ann. S.N.H., 1902, p. 197). At least thirty-four nests with
egos in June, 1905, one new colony started (f.c., 1905, p. 182).
Forty-two nests in 1907 (Duchess of Bedford, t#.c., 1908, p. 4).
A pair breeding on Burrafirth Voe had their eggs taken by the
Rev. Sorby in 1904, and another pair breeding on Hascasay
were robbed by Major Stirling in 1907. These records seem
to show that the bird has now a tendency to form new colonies,
as is the case with the Fulmar. Owter Hebrides.—One was shot
in North Harris on January 8th, 1894, the first for the Outer
Hebrides (J. A. Harvie-Brown, t.c., 1903, p. 17). Ayr.—One
was seen on October 22nd, 1907, near Lendalfoot, the first
for the Clyde area (t.c., 1908, p. 206).
IsLE OF Man.—One was caught at Douglas in the late
autumn of 1903 (P. Ralfe, Zool., 1904, p. 33).
IRELAND.—One was seen in Holyhead Harbour on July
20th, 1903 (C. J. Patten, ¢.c., 1904, p. 75). Mr. G. P. Farran
has on six occasions at various seasons and at from 30-70
miles off the isles of Kerry observed these Skuas (R. J. Ussher,
Inst of Irish Birds, p. 50; Irish Nat., 1907, p. 184).
POMATORHINE SKUA Stercorarius pomatorhinus (Temm.).
S. page 689.
This species has been recorded from all the east coast
counties except Essex of recent years.
IrELAND.—A bird in entirely brown plumage with twisted
tail-feathers was shot on May 6th, 1902, on Inniskeal Island,
co. Donegal (D. C. Campbell, Zrish Nat., 1902, p. 187). One
was picked up dead at Lough Kiltooris, co. Donegal, on May
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 331
29th, 1902 (J. Steele-Elliott, Zool., 1906, p. 154). One was
shot on June 6th, 1906, at Loop Head, co. Clare (R. M. Bar-
rington, Jrish Nat., 1906, p. 193). The followmg were seen in
1906 by Mr. G. P. Farran, of the Fisheries Board, while 20-30
miles off the south-west coast :—One on October 16th off
Drogheda ; four on November 6th off Tearaght, co. Kerry ;
also seen in May (R. J. Ussher, t.c., 1907, pp. 163 and 184).
LONG-TAILED SKUA_ Stercorarius parasiticus (L.).
S. page 693.
SoMERSET.—One was shot on October 19th, 1903, at
Axbridge (S. Lewis, Zool., 1904, p. 461) ; said to be the fourth
for Somerset (F. L. Blathwayt, t.c., 1905, p. 36).
TrELAND.—An adult was caught on Clare Island, co. Mayo,
on June 14th, 1906 (R. M. Barrington, Irish Nat., 1906, p.
193).
GREAT AUK Alca impennis L. 8. page 697.
The late Professor Newton in an interesting article on the
‘“* Orcadian Home of the Garefowl ”’ (Jbis, 1898, pp. 587-592)
explains that the breeding place of the Great Auk was on the
Holm of Papa Westray, and not in Papa Westray itself.
Professor Newton, in company with the late Henry Evans,
Colonel Bolland, and Mr. Joseph Whitaker, landed on the Holm
on June 27th, 1898, and visited the very spot which he thought
must have been the “true home of the species whose
extirpation, so far as Orkney is concerned, was compassed
in 1813 by Bullock.”
Bones of this species have been found in Antrim, Donegal,
and Clare, in addition to Waterford (R. J. Ussher, List of
Irish Birds, p..51, and Irish Nat., 1899, pp. 1-4, 1902, p. 188).
BRUNNICH’S GUILLEMOT Uria bruennichi E. Sabine.
S. page 701.
YORKSHIRE.—One was procured near Flamborough Head
in November, 1899, and one was shot about two miles off
Castle Foot on October 28th, 1902 (T. H. Nelson, Birds of
Yorks., p. 725).
[On June 14th, 1908, when off the Pinnacle Rocks, Farne
Islands, in a boat, Messrs. H. B. Booth and Riley Fortune
saw a bird which they identified as an example of this species.
‘* . .. it was not in full summer plumage, and it was the
fact of having more white upon its neck and lower throat in
contrast to its companions, the Common Guillemots, that
first drew my attention to it, and it was rather darker on the
352 BRITISH BIRDS.
upperparts... . . Its thicker, slightly shorter, and differently-
shaped beak was quite distinct from that of the Common
Guillemot." = 22.5 I could distinctly see (through my field-
glasses} the white line along the edge of the basal half of
the upper mandible” (H. B. Booth, Nat., 1908, p. 289).]
BLACK GUILLEMOT Uma grylle (L.). 8S. page 703.
CoRNWALL.—One was picked up dead near the St. Anthony
Lighthouse, Falmouth, on March 12th, 1905, during’ very
stormy weather. One of the rarest casuals in Cornwall
(J. Clark, Zool., 1907, p. 287).
Norrotk.—I'wo were seen near Wells by Mr. C. Hamond,
on January 8th, 1898 (J. H. Gurney, ¢.c., 1899, p. 118).
LITTLE AUK Mergulus alle (L.). 8. page 705.
A great irruption of Little Auks occurred during February
and March, 1900, when numbers were washed up chiefly on
the Norfolk coast, and many in Suffolk. Compared to the
‘‘ invasion ”’ in 1895 there were more if anything on this coast
in 1900, but “‘the incursion expended itself in a space of
about fifty miles extending from the Wash to Lowestoft,
and reaching its maximum at Cley.” Not so many were found
inland as in 1895, and although the numbers were large,
there appeared to be fewer on the Yorkshire and Lincolnshire
coasts. Norfolk appears to have recorded five great irruptions
of this bird, viz., October, 1841 (probably the greatest) ;
December, 1848; November, 1861; January, 1895;
February, 1900 (J. H. Gurney, Zool., 1901, pp. 124-126; cf. also
T..H. Nelson, Birds of Yorks., p. 731). One bird recorded
‘‘ about mid-winter, 1900,” on St. Agnes, Scilly Isles (J. Clark
and F. R. Rodd, t.c., 1906, p. 345), perhaps was a straggler
from this horde. On January 4th, 1900, a great number
were reported from North Uist, and in February many along
the Aberdeen coast and several in the Forth area (Ann.
S.N.H., 1901, p. 144). In the latter half of February, 1901,
also over fifty were reported on the Norfolk coast (J. H.
.Gurney, Zool., 1902, p. 87).
WHITE-BILLED NORTHERN DIVER Colymbus adamsi
G,. BR. Gray. 8. page 711.
[On December 31st, 1901, a Diver with the whole of lower
and about two-thirds of upper mandibles white, was picked
up at Caister, Norfolk, but Mr. Gurney does not think the
bill was sufficiently upturned for this species. Nor does he
ADDITIONS SINCE’ 1899. 339
consider the specimen figured in Babington’s “ Birds of
Suffolk ” a true C. adamsi (J. H. Gurney, Zool., 1902, p. 99;
cf. also W. R. Ogilvie-Grant, antea, Vol. I., p. 295).]
BLACK-THROATED DIVER Colymbus arcticus L.
S. page 713.
NortH WaALEs.—One seen by Mr. T. A. Coward in Aberffraw
Bay, Anglesey, on April 21st, 1905, was in summer plumage
(H. E. Forrest, Vert. F. N. Wales, p. 406).
RED-THROATED DIVER Colymbus septentrionalis L.
S. page 715.
Moult.—At the end of September and beginning of October,
1898, Mr. W. Farren had several examples of this species
sent to him, and the majority of the adults were entirely
devoid of flight feathers, both primaries and secondaries
being shed en masse (Ann. S.N.H., 1899, p. 114).
GREAT CRESTED GREBE Podicipes cristatus (L.).
Oo pace arta.
ScoTLAND.—T'iree.—Two pairs in breeding plumage on a
loch on May 22nd, 1900, were reported (Ann. S.N.H., 1901,
p. 145). ‘Is now (1904) a rapidly extending species in the
nesting season, and nests freely in many parts both south and
north of Forth and Clyde. One was seen on May 7th, 1903,
in Assynt by Mr. F. L. Blathwayt, the first record for
Sutherlandshire”’ (J. A. Harvie-Brown, A Fauna of N.W.
Highlands and Skye, pp. 345-346). Three pairs nesting on
Lake of Menteith (Perth), in 1905. Breeding range still
slowly but surely extending (T. T. Mackeith, Zool., 1905,
p. 314).
From the published records there seems to be no doubt
that in England the nesting birds are still increasing in
numbers. This increase is very noticeable in the Midlands.
Records of breeding from the northern counties (Cumberland,
Durham, Northumberland, etc.) seem to be lacking, however.
RED-NECKED GREBE Podicipes griseigena (Bodd.).
S. page 719.
This species is rare on the west side of Great Britain and
on the south coast of England.
JERSEY.—One is recorded without date (H. Mackay, Zool.,
1904, p. 382).
Sark.—One was seen in March, 1902 (H. E. Howard, t.c.,
1902, p. 422).
534 BRITISH BIRDS.
Surrey.—The adult male picked up on Farthing Down in
1890 (Birds of Surrey, p. 346) was in full breeding plumage
(J. A. Bucknill, Zool., 1901, p. 254).
Kent.—A male in full summer plumage was shot at sea
off Dungeness on April 14th, 1907. (N. F. T.)
Mip-Wa.xEs.—A pair was seen on the Dovey in October
and November, 1899 (J. H. Salter, t.c., 1902, p. 1).
ScoTLanD.—One was shot at Portmary on February 20th,
1900 (R. Service, Ann. S.N.H., 1900, p. 120). Another was
shot at Glencaple on October 6th, 1903 (é.c., 1904, p. 217).
One was shot on Spiggie on November 14th, 1901 (Ann.
S.N.H., 1902, p. 198), and another on Baltasound (Shetlands)
on December 30th, 1901 (T. E. Saxby, Zool., 1902, p. 113).
IRELAND.—Eleven or twelve have been taken at long in-
tervals on or near the coasts (R. J. Ussher, List of Irish Birds,
p. 52).
SLAVONIAN GREBE Podicipes auritus (L.). S. page 721.
Saunders says “its occurrence on the southern and western
shores of England seems to be irregular even in winter.”
JERSEY.—Frequent (H. Mackay, t.c., 1904, p. 382).
Scitty Isites.—An autumn and winter casual chiefly on
Tresco, by no means rare. The last was recorded in November,
1902 (J. Clark and F. R. Rodd, Zool., 1906, p. 345).
Drvon.—“ I have noticed one or two on the river [? Taw]
for the past two winters, and I am inclined to think that they
are regular winter visitors”? (B. F. Cummings, é.c., 1905,
p. 469).
OxFORDSHIRE.—Mr. O. V. Aplin gives particulars of six
winter occurrences previously unrecorded (t.c., 1899, p. 441),
and of a seventh (é.c., 1907, p. 331).
NortH Wa.LEs.—Occurs frequently in winter on the Meri-
oneth coast (H. E. Forrest, Vert. F. N. Wales, p. 409).
ScoTLaANnD.—There is considerable but not conclusive
evidence of its having bred in Benbecula (Outer Hebrides)
in 1893. Two were shot in full summer plumage in April,
1898, in Barra (J. A. Harvie-Brown, Ann. S.N.H., 1903,
pp. 21-22). One at Arisaig (Inverness) in full summer plumage
on May 13th, 1907 (é.c., 1908, p. 207).
Food.—In the stomach of one shot in the winter were
besides feathers, elytra of water-beetles and numbers of larve
of the Crane-fly (T7pula oleracea) (O. Grabham, Zool., 1899,
p- 32).. One examin ed by G. Sim from Bruckley Castle, Dee
area, contained flies, beetles, grubs, and stickle-backs (Vert.
Fauna of Dee, p. 190).
(To be continued.)
( 835 )
ON THE EGGS OF THE.TREE-PIPIT.
BY
PERCY F. BUNYARD, F.z.s., M.B.0.v.
Ir is surely a little surprising that no one has yet seriously
attempted to analyse and systematise the marvellous range
of variation which the eggs of the Tree-Pipit (Anthus trivialis)
present, in the matter of colour and arrangement of
markings. How great is this range may be gathered from
the extremely divergent descriptions which have from time
to time been published by the various authors who have
had occasion to refer to this subject.
It has been contended indeed that it is impossible to
define the limits of this variation. But with this view
I cannot agree. On the contrary, as I propose to show, the
apparent medley of colour and markings here presented can
be reduced to an orderly system comprising no less than seven
distinct types. This result, I need hardly say, could never
have been arrived at if I had not, through the kindness of
many friends, been enabled to examine a very large number
of specimens. ‘These seven types (not varieties, be it noted)
are, in my opinion, of sufficiently frequent occurrence, and so
constant and well-defined as to justify this classification.
They may be divided into two classes, namely, mottled,
and spotted. I recognise three types of mottled eggs,
two of which are very distinct; while in the spotted
eggs I can distinguish four types, three of which have very
strongly marked characteristics. It will be observed that I
have endeavoured to describe the extreme, and less modified,
forms of each of these; varieties I have not in this paper
attempted to deal with; though they are of frequent
occurrence they may, with a keen eye, and a little trouble,
be traced to one or other of the types just referred to.
A few words in regard to the system upon which I have
worked to obtain these results may be of interest, though
I do not pretend that this system would be applicable to the
eggs of all species. The work of most importance is the
separation of the clutches into their respective types (by no
means a difficult operation), keeping them separate by placing
each type in a separate tray upon which white cotton wool
has been carefully and evenly spread ; if glass-lid boxes are
used the lids should be removed before attempting to dis-
tinguish the colours; always use a magnifying glass of low
power, which assists very materially in obtaining accuracy
536 BRITISH BIRDS
in regard to oe shape, formation of the markings, texture
of shell, etc. ; the stronger the light the better; I prefer sun-
light, but of course not direct sun- light. As each point is
determined, it should at once be carefully noted down, thus :
ground colour, colour of markings, position and arrangement
of markings, shape, and, finally, the texture of the shell.
In the following descriptions it should be remarked that I
have referred to “ Eggs of the Birds of Europe,” by H. E.
Dresser, Parts VII. and VIII., plate 4, and also to “ Eggs of
British Birds,’ by Henry Seebohm, plate 58.* Mr. Dresser
figures six types, Mr. Seebohm four only, and, curiously, the
one type not figured by Mr. Dresser. To have done full justice
to this article I should have preferred to have had plates
specially drawn, however, I trust that I have made myself
as clear as possible in referring to those mentioned. Some
interesting points have been brought to light in connection
with the description of these various types. Most noticeable
among them is the slight variation in the thickness and
texture of the shell. A fact which I think is pretty generally
known is that some types occur much less frequently than
others, as is also the case with the eggs of the Red-backed
Shrike and others. Locality, or climatic conditions have
apparently nothing whatever to do with these variations. I
have received the whole seven distinct types, from as many
different localities ; continental eggs exhibited precisely the
same types.
MorttieD Type (No. 1)—Brick-red, very distinct.
GROUND coLouR.—White. The markings are so close as
almost to obliterate the ground colour, though there is generally
one or more eggs in a clutch in w hich the ground colour is
fairly conspicuous.
MarkKINGsS, normal.— Rich brick-red to light red (Dresser,
pl. 4, No. 15), mottlings very close. Haxtreme type—Mottlings
obliterate ground colour. Modified type—Markings well
defined, ground colour conspicuous, shell markings more or
less absent (Dresser, pl. 4, No. 13). A rare variety of this
type occurs in which the markings are bold and well defined
(Dresser, pl. 4, No. 22) which is intermediate between the
red mottled type (No. 1) and the red spotted, or blotched,
type (No. 4). This variety has also a slight suspicion of shell
markings of purplish grey. Fine hair-like scrollings at the
broad end occur in this type.
* These works will throughout the rest of this paper be quoted
simply as ‘‘ Dresser, pl. 4, No. —,”’ and ‘‘ Seebohm, pl. 58.”
ON THE EGGS OF THE TREE-PIPIT. 3837
SHAPE.—Normal, a short conical oval, sometimes fully
rounded. Narrow pointed ovals occur less frequently.
SHELL.—Finely grained, glossy, sometimes dull, fairly thick
and strong for the size.
Morttep Tyre (No. 2)—Purplish-red, distinct.
GROUND CoLouR.—White. The markings do not obliterate
the ground colour so much as in type No. 1.
Markines.—In general appearance similar to the mottled
brick-red type (No. 1). The purplish tint is caused by the
presence of minute purplish-grey shell markings, which are
conspicuous, though the pigment markings are distinctly
purplish in tinge. Very little variation occurs in this type,
which is constant and well set, the fine hair-like scrollings
do not occur so frequently as in No. 1 (Dresser, pl. 4,
No. 14).
SHAPE.—Similar to No. 1, but the full rounded shape is more
frequent. Narrow pointed ovals occur.
SHELL.—Similar in every respect to No. 1, except that there
is less gloss.
MotrLeD Tyres (No. 3)—Sepia-brown, very distinct.
GROUND CoLoUR.—Greyish-white to white; sometimes dis-
tinctly pale greenish blue. Compared with the two other
mottled types, the ground colour is conspicuous, except in the
extreme type in which the mottlings are so close as almost to
obliterate it.
Marxkines.—Precisely the same in general arrangement as
in types Nos. land 2. Normal—Mottled rich sepia-brown, shell
markings brownish-grey, very inconspicuous, but in some
cases sufficiently present to alter the general appearance to
a greyish purple-brown (Dresser, pl. 4, Nos. 17 and 18).
Extreme type—Appearance entirely altered by the running
together of the mottlings, which form dark patches of colour,
giving this type an intermediate appearance between the
normal of this and the brown spotted, or blotched, type
No. 5. Modified type—Precisely the same in appearance,
but several shades paler in colour; fine hair-like markings
occur, as in types 1 and 2. The normal of this type is
often confused with the egg of the Meadow-Pipit, and in
general appearance it somewhat resembles the egg of that
species, except in shape, size, and texture. The eggs of the
Meadow-Pipit, as a rule, do not show so much gloss.
SHELL.—Similar in every respect to type No. 1.
SHaPE.—Goes through the same variation as type No. 1.
338 BRITISH BIRDS.
SPOTTED, or BLoTCHED, TypxE (No. 4)—Red, very distinct. ~
GrouNnD CoLour.—Varies considerably from palest grey
and red, to white tinged with purple or mauve. This great
variation is brought about by very minute shell markings,
spots, and cloudings of varying shades of red, purple, and
reddish-brown, so closely conglomerated as to alter the entire
appearance of the actual ground colour.
Marxkines.—The variation in the markings is even - more
marked than in the ground colour. Normal—Rich reddish-
brown cloudings, evenly distributed spots with very dark
centres, marginated with paler shades with eye-spots of very
dark brown, a few hair-like lines of the same colour as the
margins of the eye-spots, shell markings few and very in-
conspicuous (Dresser, pl. 4, Nos. 19 and 20). Modified type
—Markings more or less confined to the broad ends, similar
in arrangement, except that the shell markings are more
conspicuous, and of a purplish tinge (Dresser, pl. 4, No. 21).
Extreme type—Markings take the form of short scrollings and
cloudings. Other markings are present, but to a very slight
extent, and are small and inconspicuous (Dresser, pl. 4, No.
16). This type is much more subject to variation than the
others.
SHAPE.—Inclined towards pointed ovals, rather more than
in the other six types.
SHELL.—Fragile compared with the mottled types, finely
grained, moderately glossy, sometimes glossless.
SPOTTED, or BLOTCHED, TyPE (No. 5)—Brown, very distinct.
GROUND coLouR.—From palest brown to brownish-grey.
In some cases there is a slight suspicion of purplish-grey.
In the modified type the ground colour is conspicuous, in the
normal and extreme types it is almost obliterated by the
markings.
Markines.—Precisely the same in arrangement as in type
No. 4 except that there is a tendency to form dark caps.
Normal—Clouded rich brown, eye-spots black-brown, mar-
ginated with paler brown, small fine short scrollings of the
same colour as the eye-spots. Shell-markings, rich brown-
grey, inconspicuous. Hatreme type—Rich brown spots and
cloudings, ground colour almost obliterated ; shell-markings
inconspicuous or totally absent. Modified type—Finely dotted
and ‘“ short-scrolled’’ with rich brown; ground colour con-
spicuous (Dresser, pl. 4, No. 23). This type is constant, well
set, and subject to little variation.
SHAPE.—Broad ovals, sometimes slightly pointed.
ON THE EGGS OF THE TREE-PIPIT. 339
SHELL.—Very fragile, finely grained, displaying more gloss
than in the other types.
SPOTTED, or BLOTCHED, Tyre (No. 6)—Purplish brown, very
distinct.
GROUND coLouR.—Purplish-grey, giving the whole egg a
distinctly purplish appearance. The ground colour in this type
is very conspicuous and seldom obliterated by the markings.
MarRKINGS.—Similar in arrangement and appearance to
types Nos. 4 and 5, except that the markings are more pro-
minent and better defined. Normal—EKye-spots and short
scrollings, rich purplish-brown, marginated with paler shades,
cloudings pale purple-grey ; shell markings, dark purplish-
grey, few. Hatreme type—Markings more abundant and
richer in colour, ground colour is also darker by several shades.
Shell markings almost absent. Modified type—Similar in
general appearance, but the ground colour more conspicuous.
Markings form zones, or caps; shell-markings conspicuous
(Dresser, pl. 4, No. 24). This type is constant, well fixed,
and subject to less variation than No. 4.
SHAPE.—Goes through precisely the same variations as in
types Nos. 4 and 5.
SHELI..—Thin and fragile, but less so than in types Nos.
4 and 5.
SPOTTED, or BLotcHED, TyPsE (No. 7)—Green ground, distinct.
GROUND COoLOUR.—Very conspicuous, and distinctly green-
ish, giving the whole egg a green appearance, which separates
it from types Nos. 4, 5 and 6.
Markincs.—In appearance similar to types Nos. 4, 5 and 6,
but as a rule more evenly distributed and better defined.
Normal—Kye-spots and short scrollings, rich umber to sepia-
brown, marginated with paler shades, cloudings pale brown ;
shell markings pale purplish-brown (Seebohm, pl. 58a, third
from right). Hxtreme type—Eye-spots very dark brown, less
marginated than in the normal; ground colour inclined
towards olive-brown; shell markings almost absent. The
markings sometimes form caps and zones, giving the egg a
very rich appearance. Modified type—Similar, except that
the short scrollings predominate; ground colour more
conspicuous ; shell markings dark grey-brown, few, sometimes
quite absent. This type occurs much less frequently than any
of the other six types, but is distinct and well fixed.
SHAPE.—Similar to that in types Nos. 4, 5 and 6, but there
is a tendency towards a smaller size.
SHELL.—Very thin and fragile, rather more gloss than in the
other types.
THE BIBLIOGRAPHY OF BRITISH BIRDS.
To compile a complete bibliography of a subject which has
attracted so much attention for so many years as the orni-
thology of this country would be a task of great magnitude, and
so far as we know no such bibliography has been attempted,
although we have had most useful papers on the subject by
Dr. Elliott Coues in the ‘‘ Proceedings of the U.S. Museum ”’
(1880), and in Mr. Miller Christy’s ‘‘ Catalogue of Local Lists ”’
(1891), as well as by the late Professor Newton in the
‘“‘ Dictionary of Birds.” A valuable contribution towards the
subject has just reached us in the form of a pamphlet entitled
‘A List of Books relating to British Birds published before the
Year 1815.” These are from the hbrary of our contributor,
Mr. W. H. Mullens, and the pamphlet forms an “ Occasional
Publication No. 3,” of the Hastings and St. Leonards Natural
History Society. Seven plates giving facsimiles of rare and
notable editions will be much appreciated, while the extremely
carefully drawn up details of the works themselves cannot fail
to be of the greatest value. We are glad to see the words
“to be continued ” at the end of the pamphlet, and we would
suggest that if those who possess valuable ornithological
libraries would co-operate with Mr. Mullens the task of
forming a bibliography of British birds might be accomplished.
EDs..
COMPARATIVE LEGISLATION FOR THE
PROTECTION OF BIRDS.
In Vol. I., page 354, we called attention to an offer by the
Royal Society for the Protection of Birds of a gold medal and
a prize of twenty guineas for the best essay on the subject
of “*Comparative Legislation for the Protection of Birds.”
This prize has been awarded to Mr. A. H. Macpherson, while
a second prize of ten guineas has been given to Lieut.-Colonel
G. A. Momber.—Eps.
THE BRITISH SONG-THRUSH AND DARTFORD
WARBLER.
Dr. Ernst Hartrert has already described in these pages
(Vol. I., pp. 208-222, Vol. II., pp. 130-131) a number of
geographical races of birds which are peculiar to the British
Islands. At the meeting of the British Ornithologists’ Club
held on January 20th last, he called attention to the differ-
NOTES. 341
ences between British and Continental examples of the Song-
Thrush. He pointed out that the non-migratory race breeding
in Great Britain and Ireland differed in the warmer, more
rufous, colour of the upper surface, especially the rump.
These parts are more olive-brown, generally paler, and with
a faint greenish tinge, in the birds breeding on the Continent
and migrating to the Mediterranean countries in winter.
The underside of the British race was often more heavily
spotted, and this was especially conspicuous in specimens
from the Hebrides, while others from the same islands were
in every way similar to English examples. For this reason
Dr. Hartert did not, for the present, distinguish more than
one British race, which he proposed to call Turpus
PHILOMELOS CLARKEI, in honour of Mr. Eagle Clarke, who had
first called his attention to the dark coloration of the British
race. ‘The difference had also been noticed by other British
ornithologists. Dr. Hartert mentioned that the correct
name of the Song-Thrush was T'urdus philomelos, the first
description of 7’. musicus undoubtedly referring to the
Redwing ; while the name 7’. cliacus was not available at all,
as in the first instance it referred to three distinct species,
viz., the Song-Thrush, Mistle-Thrush, and Redwing.
While we thoroughly agree with Dr. Hartert in his separation
of these races, and applaud his good work, we think it only
right to state that we cannot agree with him in abolishing old
and well-known names and substituting for them names
which are quite unknown to the average ornithologist. Dr.
Hartert adheres most strictly to certain rules in order to
secure stability in nomenclature, but in many cases, such for
instance as the present, these rules act in our opinion in a
directly opposite way to that which was intended, in that
they disrupt the past. The Song-Thrush has been called
“Turdus musicus”’ in countless books and papers, and if we now
alter that name surely we show no regard for the past, while
to the future ornithologist the innumerable references to this
bird under the name of 7’. musicus will be obscured. With
no wish to argue such an intricate question in these pages
we can but state our firm conviction that to adhere strictly
to a rule in such a case as this amounts to making the rule a
fetish. Having no wish to be the blind slave of any rule,
we are determined to call the British Song-Thrush T'urdus
musicus clarke.
In part V. of Dr. Hartert’s work (Die Vog. der pal. Fauna,
p. 601) we note that he separates the Dartford Warbler of
England and North-west France from the typical bird of
342 BRITISH BIRDS.
the continent under the name of Sylvia undata dartfordiensis
of Latham, by reason of its slightly smaller size, its dull,
chocolate-brown, instead of slaty-grey, upperside, and by the
flanks being washed with brown instead of grey.—EDs.
NORTHERN WILLOW-WREN IN NORFOLK.
Ir may be of interest to record that a specimen of Phylloscopus
trochilus eversmanni (cf. antea, Vol. II., p. 234) was shot on the
Norfolk coast during the second week of May, 1908. Another
specimen shot in the same locality during the month of
September is of greater interest, because Dr. C. B. Ticehurst
had not detected this bird in the autumn. Both specimens
have been examined by Dr. Ticehurst, and the autumn bird
exhibits in its plumage practically none of the green and
yellow characteristic of the typical Willow-Wren.
CLIFFORD BoRRER.
Another example of this race shot at Cley, Norfolk, in
October, 1901, has been very kindly submitted to me by Mr.
Ernest M. Connop, of Wroxham, in whose collection it now is.
The bird, which has been examined by Dr. Ticehurst and myself,
is greyish-brown on the upperside and greyish-white on the
underside and has no green or yellow (except in the axillaries)
in its plumage. The eyestripe is white. An additional
interest attaches to this specimen in that it was examined by
Howard Saunders, and I am indebted to Mr. Connop for a
view of a letter regarding the bird which Howard Saunders
wrote to Mr. Pashley, of Cley. Although it was not his
practice to distinguish very closely allied forms by name,
and although he makes no reference to this race in his
‘* Manual,” it is clear from the letter that Howard Saunders
fully recognised its characteristics. “* Your bird,” he wrote
to Mr. Pashley, “is (in my opinion, of course) simply a Willow-
Wren Ph. trochilus, but it is a very interesting example—and
quite an old bird—of the northern form, which, as Seebohm
says (Cat. Birds B. M., V., p. 58) ‘ occasionally in high northern
latitudes has all the green and yellow abraded and the general
plumage earthy-brown, the eyestripe having faded to greyish-
white and the underparts also to white.’ The wing-formula
is absolutely that of the Willow-Wren, and one of Seebohm’s
specimens from the Yenesei, Siberia, matches your bird
exactly.”’
Seebohm’s opinion that the brown and grey colouring was
produced. by fading and abrasion is now, of course, proved to
be an error, since spring specimens exhibit the same
characteristics.
NOTES. 343
As some confusion still exists in the minds of some of my
correspondents with regard to the various races of Willow-
Wrens and Chiffchaffs which have now been detected as
occurring in this country, it may be well to summarise the
information.
THe TypicaL WILLOw-WREN (P. trochilus trochilus).
THE NORTHERN WILLOW-WREN (P. trochilus eversmannt).—
Now found to occur both on the autumn and spring passage,
but apparently much more frequently in the spring. Breeds in
Northern Russia, from the Kolyma westwards to the Timan
Hills, and possibly to Norway (c/. supra, p. 234). Except in
the axillaries there is practically no green or yellow in its
plumage.
THe TypicaL CuHirrcHarF (P. rufus rufus).
THe East EvRopEAN CHIFFCHAFF (P. rujus abietina).—
So far has only once been detected in this country (cf. supra,
p. 233). Breeds in Scandinavia, Russia (south of 65°), East
Prussia, Austria, and the Balkans. It is of slightly larger size
and paler coloration than the typical form.
THE SIBERIAN CHIFFCHAFF (P. rufus tristis)—Has been
found on several occasions in winter in the Orkney and
Shetland groups (cf. Vol. I., pp. 8 and 382). Breeds in Siberia
from the Petchora to Lake Baikal. LEasily distinguishable by
its very brown upperside, grey underside, brownish flanks,
and bright golden axillaries.
H. F. WIrHERBY.
LESSER SPOTTED WOODPECKER BREEDING IN
MERIONETH.
Mr. R. J. Luoyp-Pricst, of Rhiwlas, Bala, informs me that
last year a pair of Lesser Spotted Woodpeckers (Dendrocopus
minor) nested in an oak-tree close to his head-keeper’s house.
They hatched and reared the young, but all left before winter.
This is the first recorded instance of the species breeding in
North Wales so far to the west as Merioneth, where, indeed,
it has hitherto been met with only occasionally.
H. E. Forrest.
HOOPOE IN MERIONETH.
Mr. Liuoyp-PricE writes me that a Hoopoe (Upwpa epops)
appeared on the lawn at Rhiwlas, Bala, one day in August,
1907. He watched it for a considerable time walking about,
and every now and then erecting its crest. The Hoopoe is
very rare in Wales, and has only once before been recorded in
Merioneth. H. E. Forrest.
344. BRITISH BIRDS.
LITTLE OWL IN WARWICKSHIRE AND
WORCESTERSHIRE.
Aw adult female specimen of the Little Owl (Athene noctua)
was shot at Barston, Warwickshire, on November 15th or
16th, 1908, by Mr. Russell. It is not the Sutton Coldfield
specimen already recorded (antea, Vol. II.,p. 240). The distance
between the two places would be fifteen to twenty miles.
No other specimen has been seen by Mr. Russell.
Another example was shot at King’s Norton, Worcester-
shire, on October 14th, 1907. This bird rose from a ditch,
and the gentleman who shot it mistook it for a Woodcock !
Another has been seen there since, and I have urged the
gentleman not to shoot it. Both my specimens are adult
females.
F. CoBuRN.
THE FOOD OF THE COMMON EIDER.
THat the Common Eider (Somateria molissima) feeds mainly
on shell-fish is well known, yet the following summary of the
results of a number of dissections which I have made may be
of interest to the readers of BririsH Brrps.
On one occasion I found the remains of a crab in the gizzard,
and of a crab and starfish in the crop.
‘“‘ Periwinkles ’’? seem to be very commonly eaten. I have
taken as many as twenty of their shells from a single gizzard.
In many Eiders a bulge in the throat may often be seen,
and on examination this proves to be caused by a “ Razor-
sheil ” (Hnsis siliqua), locally known as the “‘ Spute-fish,” and
used by the fishermen as a bait. Sometimes one valve of the
shell is missing. Examples as long as eight inches are some-
times swallowed, and often one end of the shell is broken,
leaving a jagged edge. The dissolution of the contained
animal evidently takes place in the crop, and the shell is, we
may assume, ejected, as other birds eject pellets, since it could
never pass through the intestines. It is curious that Razor-
shells are never found in birds killed in the early morning.
The shells of univalves are disintegrated, partly, apparently
by the action of the gastric juices, and partly by the trituration
of the gizzard.
The Eider is aiso fond of limpets. My boatman once reared
an Kider drake, which was the terror of the limpet-pickers on
the island, for it would steal the limpets as fast as they were
detached from the rocks, and would attack the pickers with
great spirit, using beak, wings, and feet, should they object to
the levying of this toll! H. W. Rosinson.
NOTES. 345
VELVET-SCOTER IN SHROPSHIRE.
HirHerRTO the only known instance of the occurrence of
(Hdemia fusca in Shropshire was an adult male found
exhausted near Whitchurch on November 23rd, 1866. It was
preserved by John Shaw, of Shrewsbury, who recorded it at
the time in the “Field.” Mr. F. Coburn, of Birmingham,
recently informed me of a second example which came into
his hands—an immature female shot on December 12th, 1890,
at Clungunford, near Ludlow, by Mr. Graham Williams.
H. E. Forrest.
INCREASE OF WOOD-PIGEONS IN ORKNEY.
Ir is recorded in Howard Saunders’ ‘‘Manual” that the
Wood-Pigeon is pushing northwards, and breeds locally and
sparingly in the Orkney Islands. It may be interesting to
note that during the last two years—1907-08—I have found
the bird breeding in increasing numbers in the Island of
Shapinshay, Orkney Islands. I noticed in 1907 at least two
pairs in the trees round Balfour Castle, and last year I shot
two and picked up one young bird dead in the garden of
Balfour Castle, and frequently saw eight or nine birds on the
grass opposite the castle. I may add the bird is most
destructive in the garden at Balfour, and already the damage
done is considerable to the kitchen garden crops.
JAMES R. HALE.
RED VARIETY (P. MONTANA) OF THE COMMON
PARTRIDGE.
As the note in the last number of BririsH Brrps (p. 311)
conveys the impression that Lord Forester’s specimens are
the only examples of the rufous form of Partridge obtained
in Shropshire, it may be of interest to state that it has been
met with in several places. There is a specimen in the British
Museum from Acton Reynald, near Shrewsbury. An example
described in the “ Field,’ November, 1902, was shot at
Farmcote, near Bridgnorth. arlier in the same year Mr. H. L.
Horsfall obtained four Partridges at Gatacre Park, Bridgnorth,
one of which he sent me for examination. It was of the same
dark red hue as P. montana beneath, but the back was
beautifully spangled with creamy-white, on adark ground. It
closely resembled the variety figured by Mr. Frohawk in the
“ Field,” February 13th, 1897. A similar bird in the museum at
Whitchurch, Salop, was shot near that place in the autumn
of 1902, by Mr. J. M. Etches, who informed me that there
546 BRITISH BIRDS.
were several others like it in the covey. Three examples of
the typical P. montana were shot at Albrighton, near
Shrewsbury, on October 6th, 1905.
H. E. Forrest.
[Mr. J. R. B. Masefield kindly sends us a copy of a paper
on a number of occurrences of this variety in Staffordshire
which he contributed to the “Transactions of the North
Staffordshire Field Club” (1902, pp. 65-68, with Plate), and
he tells us that he has examined from time to time examples
showing almost every possible gradation between what may
be termed the true P. montana and the normal P. cinerea.
The erythristic variety of the Partridge, as is well-known,
constantly occurs and recurs in many parts of this country,
and the subject is of considerable interest in that no satis-
factory reason, so far as we know, has as yet been adduced
to explain the much more persistent nature of erythrism in
this, than in apparently in any other, species.—EDs. |
RaRE BrirRDs ON THE ISLE oF May (FirtH oF FortTH).—We
referred in our last volume (p. 295) to the results of a visit
to this island in 1907 by two energetic lady ornithologists.
In 1908 the island was again visited by Miss Evelyn V. Baxter,
from September 10th to October 9th, and we extract the most
important results from her paper in the “ Annals of Scottish
Natural History’ (1909, pp. 5-20). ReEp-sporrED BLUE-
THROAT (Cyanecula suecica).—Single birds were seen on
September 22nd and 23rd, two on the 24th, and several on
the 25th, and one on October 5th. YELLOW-BROWED
WARBLER (Phylloscopus swperciliosus)—One on September
22nd, one on the 24th, one on the 25th, and another on October
3rd. British Coau Tir (Parus ater britannicus).—One _ pro-
cured October Ist. British BiuE Tit (Parus ceruleus
obscurus).—One on September 30th. [Both these records
are interesting as there is little proof that Tits are wanderers.
Waite Wagcrtait (Motacilla alba).—Four or five adults on
September 20th. GrEeAT GREY SHRIKE (Lanius excubitor).—
One on October 25th. ScarLter GrRosBEak (Pyrrhula ery-
thrina).—An adult female on September 12th.
Miss Baxter also kindly informs us that the Ropins and
GOLDCRESTS which she obtained have been examined at the
Royal Scottish Museum and pronounced to be of the British
race.
Buack REDSTARTS IN CO. WATERFORD.—Mr. R. J. Ussher
caught a female or immature male Ruticilla titys at Cappagh
NOTES. 347
House, on November 4th, 1908, and before liberating it he
saw another on the window sill. On the same date in 1907
he caught one in his bedroom, and on November 2nd of that
year he saw another, while two were caught in his house in
1895, on October 29th and November 2nd (Irish Nat.,
1909, p. 26).
Woop-WREN IN HEREFORDSHIRE IN WintER.—A Warbler
seen at close range by Mr. A. B. Farn near the River Wye
on January 9th last, is said by him to have been without.
doubt an example of Phylloscopus sibilatrix (Zool., 1909,
Pp. 25):
DrerER IN Kent.—Mr. A. H. Hardy writes to the “ Field ”
(19, xir., 08, p. 1103) that he saw a Dipper (Cinclus aquaticus)
on the River Stour on December 11th, 1908. The species
is a rare straggler to Kent. Dr. N. F. Ticehurst tells us
that he has notes of some dozen occurrences, and adds that:
the bird is supposed to have nested on one occasion at Chart-
ham, not far from the locality of the present record.
SCARCITY OF THE LONG-TAILED TIT IN A YORKSHIRE
District.—Mr. H. B. Booth records the scarcity of the
Long-tailed Tit in Upper Airedale and Upper Wharfedale
(West Yorkshire). Only three occurrences of the bird in
the breeding season are known during the last fifteen years,
although a few years before it nested annually in these
districts, and does so commonly in adjoining districts. No
reason can be assigned for the desertion of the neighbourhood
by the bird (Nat., 1909, pp. 55-57).
CoaL-TITMOUSE ON THE Bass Rockx.—Mr. W. Evans reports
that two Parus ater occurred on the Bass Rock on September
28th, 1908. Only a wing and leg were sent to him, so that he
could not say whether the birds were British or Continental
(Ann. S.N.H., 1909, p. 49).
Late Stay oF SwaALLtow IN IRELAND.—An immature
Hirundo rustica was seen (and unfortunately shot) on December
9th, 1908, near Clondalkin, co. Dublin (W. J. Williams, Jrish
Nat., 1909, p. 56):
BRAMBLING IN WEST SUTHERLAND.—A number of Bramb-
lings (Fringilla montifringilla) were seen on October 25th,
1908, at Inchnadamph. The bird has not hitherto been
identified in this area (J. T. Henderson, Ann. S.N.H., 1909,
p: 47).
348 BRITISH BIRDS.
SNow-GEESE IN co. Mayo.—A flock of four Chen hyperboreus
were seen flying over Bartragh Island by Mr. Claud Kirkwood
‘“‘a day or so after December 29th, 1908.” They were easily
recognised by their snow-white plumage and black-tipped
wings (R. Warren, Zool., 1909, p. 77). For previous records
of this species in the same district see page 27 of the present
volume.
GADWALL IN FirEesHiIRE.—A young male Chaulelasmus
streperus was shot near Tayport on November 14th, 1908.
The bird is of irregular occurrence on the east coast of
Scotland (W. Berry, Ann. S.N.H., 1909, p. 49).
GARGANEY BREEDING IN East YorRKSHIRE.—Mr. W. H.
St. Quintin, of Scampston, East Yorkshire, writes to the
‘“‘ Naturalist ” (1909, p. 38) that an entirely wild pair of
Garganey (Querquedula circia) made a nest in May, 1908, near
the River Derwent, the female laying some eight eggs. These,
being in a dangerous place, were taken, and from them four
drake and two duck Garganeys were reared.
ApuLt Lone-TaILeD Duck INLAND.—An adult female
Harelda glacialis was shot on the Spey forty miles from the
sea in October, 1908 (J. R. Pelham Burn, Ann. S.N.H., 1909,
p- 49).
TurTLE-DovE In co. DoNnEGAL IN WinTER.—An adult
male T'urtur communis (scarce at any time in Ireland) was
shot among some Wood-Pigeons near Muff, co. Donegal, on
November 30th, 1908 (D. C. Campbell, Irish Nat., 1909,
p- 96).
SUPPOSED GREAT BuSTARD IN YORKSHIRE.—Mr. J. Morley
records in the ‘‘ Zoologist”’ (1909, p. 78) that a Mr. Bennett
shot a Great Bustard near Scarborough ‘ about last Christmas-
time,’ which he had cooked and found superior in delicacy to
a Turkey! Although the skin was not preserved, we find
on enquiry that two of the tail-feathers were, and Mr.
Oxley Grabham informs us that these have been positively
identified as those of a female Silver-Pheasant! It is well to
make sure of the facts before putting into print the record of
a rarity.
Erratum.—We regret that in the last number, on p. 310,
the scientific name of Montagu’s Harrier was given by a slip
as Circus ceruginosus instead of C. cineraceus.—EDs.
- DEVOTEDTOTHEBIRDS'ON
- >. THEBRTISHIUST
MONTHLY: gesmunre ‘NET
_ S2SHIGITOLDORNIENDON
~_ WITHERBY & C2
Ey,
j
DALLMEYER 5.
Naturalists’ Cane
, For Telephoto. or Ordinary LENSES.
Positive Lens Works at f/4.
DALUMEYER’S
Lenses are used
_. by the most —
| skilled Bird
Photographers.
The RA are
specially recommended :»
THE STIGMATIC SERIES I. F/6 (Convertible)
‘THE SERIES D PATENT PORTRAIT LENSES F 6.
(A Rapid Long Focus Lens at a Moderate Price.)
High or Moderate Power Telephoto Lenses (Original Make).
We are Specialists tn Cameras and Apparatus for Photo- Ornathalgists,
CATALOGUES AND ADVICE. FREE.
| J. H. DALLMEVER, Limirep, benziL ao,.
Showrooms: 25, NEWMAN ST., pre NEASOEN, LONDON, N.W.
JUST RECEIVED.
Birdskins from Siberia, Mongolia, South Russia, etc., including veeaind®
interesting ‘species. In fine condition.
f For Particulars apply to—
W. F. H. ROSENBERG,
Naturalist and Importer of Zoological Collections,
57, HAVERSTOCK HILL, LONDON, N.W. :
| Price Lists of Birdskins, Eggs, Mammals, Reptiles, Batrachians, agian
Lepidoptera, Apparatus, etc., post free on Application.
WATKINS & DONCASTER,
; Haturalists, :
f And Manufacturers of CABINETS and APPARATUS for Entomology: Birds’ Fees
and Skins, and all Branches of Natural History. i
A LARGE STOCK OF ‘INSECTS, and BIRDS’ EGGS and SKINS.
Speciality: —Objects for Nature Study, Drawing Classes, &c.
BIRDS, MAMMALS, &c., PRESERVED and MOUNTED by ETRST-OLASS WORKMER
TRUE TO NATURE
All Books and Publications on pana iioeine keiniien.,
36, STRAND, LONDON, W.G. ve Doors tum Charing Gross.)
Catalogue (102 PP.) post frees
if ‘
ae
tei Eee
pl od Lah
ture
1¢
F. Bacon, after the pi
ny
b
Ramsay
ing
from the engrav
by James
ICK,
r
THOMAS BEW
oe
DRIESIBIRDS
POE > BY ~H. Fe WITHERBY,--F.Z.S.;° M.B.0:U.
Rosier) BY: W. P. PYCRAFY, A.LS., M.B.0.U.
ConTENTS OF NuMBER I11, Vou. II. Aprit 1, 1909.
Some Early British Ornithologists and their Works, by
W. H. Mullens, mM.a., Lu.mM., M.B.o.u.. WVIIJI.—Thomas
Bewick (1753—1828) and George Montagu (1751—1815). Page 351
Marking Birds: Notes on the Work at the Rossitten
Station, by A. Landsborough Thomson 362
On the More Important Additions to our Ruowindes of
British Birds since 1899, by H. F. Witherby and N. F.
Ticehurst. Part XIX.—(continued from page 334) .. 368
Notes :—Notes from Sussex (J. Walpole-Bond). Rare Birds
in Pembrokeshire (W. Maitland Congreve, Lieut. R.A.).
Bird Protection in Yorkshire (Eds.) The Birds of
Kent (Eds.) Black-throated Thrush in Kent (Thomas
Parkin). Curious Nesting Site of a Wood-Warbler (W.
S. Medlicott), Chaffinch Breeding in Winter (H. E.
Forrest). Alpine Swift in Pembrokeshire (Charles J.
P. Cave). Downy Woodpecker (Dendrocopus pubescens)
in Gloucestershire (Wm. A.Smalleombe). White-tailed
Eagle in Essex (Christopher J. H. Tower). Osprey in
Essex (Christopher J. H. Tower). Pochard Nesting in
North Kent (J. Walpole-Bond). The Food of the Eider
(Eds.). Goosander in Bedfordshire (The Duchess of
Bedford). Red Grouse and Black Grouse Hybrids (J. G.
Millais and W. R. Ogilvie-Grant). The Bill of the Great
Northern Diver (The Duchess of Bedford). Fulmar
Petrel in Lancashire (H. W. area Little Ringed
Plover in North Uist au ; = ae 376
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS
AND THEIR WORKS.
BY
W. H. MULLENS, m.a., LL.M., M.B.O.U.
VIII—THOMAS BEWICK (1753—1828) anp
GEORGE MONTAGU (1751—1815).
It is difficult to determine what position Thomas Bewick
holds among the principal British ornithologists; it is
difficult indeed to determine whether he was, in the
strict sense of the word, an ornithologist at all. It was
by a series of entirely unforeseen events that Bewick
02 BRITISH BIRDS.
found himself called upon to write even a portion of the
famous “ History of British Birds ” that bears his name,
and it certainly cannot be said that the text of that work
contains anything of much originality or importance.
“Tt is respectable but no more,” and would by itself,
founded as it was on the style of Pennant, and admittedly
deriving most of its information from his works,* in all
probability have attracted but scant and passing attention.
And yet this work of Bewick has met with extraordinary
success, it has passed through edition after edition; it
has instructed and delighted thousands upon thousands
of readers, and has in the opinion of onet who was fully
competent to judge, done more than any other work in
existence, Gilbert White’s ‘‘ Natural History of Selborne ”
alone excepted, to promote the study and pursuit of
ornithology in this country.
This great popularity and widespread influence of
Bewick’s “ History of British Birds” arose solely from
the brilliance and fidelity of the wood-cuts, with which
he was able to illustrate that work.
What Bewick and his fellow-author together entirely
failed to do with the pen, he alone most successfully
accomplished with the burin and the graver. Such was
Bewick’s skill, and so wonderful his power of transferring
his impressions to paper, that his engravings of birds,
especially of those which he was enabled to draw from
life, or from freshly-killed specimens, remain even to this
day amongst the finest black and white illustrations of
the kind which we possess. Their effect therefore at
the time of their appearance,{ and for many years after-
wards, may be easily understood, and this, coupled with
the fact of Bewick’s general renown as an artist and with
the charm of the curious and often beautiful tail-pieces
with which he and his pupils adorned his work, made
* «* Memoir of Thomas Bewick,”’ p. 162.
+ Newton, “ Dict. of Birds,” Introd., p. 19.
{ Pennant’s fourth edition of the “ British Zoology,” which appeared
in 1776, contained numerous plates of birds, but they were not very
successful.
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 355
his name one to be ever associated with the study of
British ornithology. Claims to be considered a scientific
naturalist he had none, and yet his works will be
remembered and revered, when those of far more erudite
and accomplished writers have passed away.
Many books have been written about Thomas Bewick,
his art, and his “life and times,” but by far the best
account of the artist and his work is to be derived from
the “ Memoir” which he compiled between the years
1822 and 1828, and on which he was still engaged at the
time of his death.* It was written for the information
of his daughter Jane and her brother and sisters, and is
a bulky volume of some 316 pages. From it we learn
that Thomas Bewick was born in August, 1753,+ at his
father’s house of Cherryburn, near Eltringham, in
Northumberland, and was baptized at the neighbouring
church of Ovingham, on August 19th of that same year.
Thomas was the eldest son of John Bewick, who farmed
some eight acres of land at Cherryburn, and leased a
small colliery at Mickley Bank.
Of Bewick’s somewhat tempestuous youth it is here
necessary to say but little; he was educated first at
Mickley School, and afterwards by the Rev. C. Gregson,
of Ovingdean. At a very early age he developed a taste
for drawing, and in spite of constant reproof for
‘“misspending ”’ his time, he tells us that “many of my
evenings at home were spent in filling the flags of the
floor and the hearthstone with my chalky designs.”
From this the transition to pen and ink, and brush and
colour, was rapid ; and the young artist soon commenced
to decorate the walls of his neighbours’ houses with rude
pictures, chiefly consisting of hunting scenes. At the
age of fourteen young Bewick was apprenticed to Ralph
Beilby, of Newcastle, an engraver i'n a considerable way
of business. Under Beilby’s tuition Bewick soon began
* The ‘“‘ Memoir” was first published in 1862 and again in 1887.
+ Bewick kept his birthday on August 12th, but there is a doubt
about the exact date.
354 BRITISH BIRDS.
to excel as an engraver, and the firm having been “ applied
to by printers to execute wood-cuts for them,’’* Beilby,
who had no liking for this branch of engraving, entrusted
the execution of the blocks to Bewick, who made so good
a job of it that henceforward orders for this particular
sort of work increased rapidly. Bewick’s progress in
engraving was so rapid, and was so well thought of by
his master, that he sent some of his apprentice’s cuts,
executed for “Select Fables,’ to the “Society for the
Encouragement of Arts,’ and for these Bewick received
a premium of seven guineas. In 1774 Bewick’s apprentice-
ship came to an end, and he commenced to work on his
own account, chiefly for Newcastle printers, till the middle
of 1776. In the summer of that year he made an ex-
pedition to Scotland, travelling on foot, and afterwards
went to London, where he arrived in October, 1776.
Bewick disliked the Metropolis, and returning to
Newcastle next year, entered into partnership with his
former master, Ralph Beilby. For some years Bewick
continued to busy himself with the ordinary work of his
profession, but at length having come to the conclusion
that the figures of animals, as they were represented in
the children’s books then available, were very inferior,
he resolved to try what he could do in that direction,
and on the advice of his friend, Solomon Hodgson, book-
seller and editor of the ‘‘ Newcastle Chronicle,’ he
commenced on November 15th, 1785, to cut the figure of
the dromedary,f the first of a series of wood-cuts for the
‘“ History of Quadrupeds,” which was published in
1790.£ While Bewick was engaged in drawing and cutting
the figures for the “‘ History of Quadrupeds ”’ his partner,
who was of “a bookish or reading turn, proposed to write
or compile the descriptions, but not knowing much about
natural history we got books on that subject to enable
/
* Memoir,’ p. 59:
+ Those animals which were not familiar to Bewick were copied from
Dr. Smellie’s ‘‘ Abridgment of Buffon.”
t It reached an eighth edition in 1824.
HISTORY
OF
BRITISH BIRDS.
THE FIGURES ENGRAVED ON WOOD BY T. BEWICK.
———— EE, ee
VOEF:
CONTAINING THE
HISTORY AND DESCRIPTION OF LAND BIRDS.
$$ Oo 8 RS SoA oF TS BES 280, N a
Aiea Salts Sia Aes
He Nay Me. oS a tah =
‘ ALN
eee a ie Se Se er a <a>?
ND YS SA aie Oo cher od BO. Rb Be iAP 9) Goa
NEWCASTLE:
PRINTED BY §0L. HODGSON, FOR BEILBY & BEWICK?: SOLD BY THEM,
AND c. Gc. & J). ROBINSON, LONDON.
{Price il. 1s. in Boards.)
3797-
GEORGE MONTAGU, from the Original Miniature in the possession
of the Linnzan Society, London.
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 357
him to form a better notion of these matters.” These
descriptions Bewick helped to revise and correct. When,
however, the title page was in preparation, Beilby wished
to appear as the author, and desired the book to be
announced as being “ by R. Beilby ” ;- but although this
idea was abandoned through the influence of Mr. Hodgson,
the foundation of the quarrel between Bewick and Beilby
was commenced, which finally led to the dissolution of
their partnership. The ‘History of Quadrupeds ”’
proved so great a success, being appreciated by young and
old alike, that Bewick began to turn his thoughts to a
“History of British Birds.”* For this purpose he
commenced to study various works on the subject, and
informs us that ‘“‘in addition to Pennant’s works, [he]
perused ‘ Albin’s History of Birds,’ Belon’s very old
book,+ Willoughby and Ray, ete. Mr. John Rotherham
gave me ‘ Gesner’s Natural History,’ with some of these
I was in raptures. Willoughby and Ray struck me as
having led the way to truth and to British Ornithology.
.... 1 was much pleased with ‘ White’s History of
Selborne.’ Pennant, however, opened out the largest
field of information, and on his works I bestowed the
most attention. The last of our ornithologists, and one
of the most indefatigible, was the late Col. George
Montagu, author of the ‘ Ornithological Dictionary ’”’
(Memoir, pp. 161, 162.)
In addition to the time he devoted to the works
above mentioned, Bewick, who at the beginning of
his undertaking had made up his mind “to copy
nothing from the works of others, but to stick to
Nature as closely as I could,” availed himself of an
invitation from Mr. Constable, the owner of ‘‘ Wycliffe,”
* This project was, however, in full consideration in 1790, vide
letter from John Bewick (1760-1795). Robinson’s ‘‘ Thomas Bewick :
his Life and Times,”’ p. 94.
+ L’Histoire de la Nature des Oyseaux, avec leurs descriptions, &
naifs portraicts. . . . Par Pierre Belon du Mans, Paris, 1555.
1 vol. folio. This work of Belon’s, though not so diffuse as Conrad
Gesner’s ‘*‘ Historia Avium ”’ of the same date, is nevertheless the most
trustworthy authority of that period.
358 BRITISH BIRDS.
to visit the museum there, which contained the collection
of birds formed by Marmaduke Tunstall.* For nearly
two months Bewick remained at ‘ Wycliffe,” making
drawings from the specimens there (some of these being
in water-colour) and commenced to engrave from them
as soon as he returned to Newcastle. Finding, however,
“the very great difference between preserved specimens
and those from Nature ... . I never felt satisfied with
them ... . and was driven to wait for birds newly shot
or brought to me alive.” All this, of course, involved
considerable delay, but “‘ after working many a late hour
upon the cuts” the first volume of “ British Birds,”
entitled “‘ Land Birds,”’ appeared in 1797. “ Mr. Beilby,”
as Bewick tells us (Memoir, p. 171), “ undertook the
writing or compilation of this (the first) volume, in which
I assisted him a great deal more than I had done with the
* Quadrupeds.’”’ Bewick was therefore surprised to
find that Beilby was determined on being recognised as
the sole author of the book. To this claim Bewick
strongly objected, and although through the intervention
of mutual friends, the title-page of the first volume
merely bore the legend ‘ Printed ... for Beilby and
Bewick,” neither of them being named as authors,t
they found it impossible to work in harmony any longer,
and their partnership was dissolved, Bewick buying up
Beilby’s share in the “‘ Quadrupeds ”’ and the first volume
of the ~ Birds.”
Bewick was now thrown upon his own resources as an
author, and by consulting all the available authorities,
and making use of his own knowledge and observations,
he composed the text of the second volume, entitled
‘ Water-Birds.” This appeared in 1804, and in the
preface Bewick states that ‘“‘ owing to a separation of
* Marmaduke Tunstall (1743-1790), the anonymous author of ,the
‘* Ornithologica Britannica,’’ London, 1771, 1 vol. folio. For an account
ot his life, vide Fox’s ‘“‘Synopsis of the Newcastle Museum,”’ where his
collection now is. It was for this same Marmaduke Tunstall that
ipl had in 1789 executed his famous wood-cut of the ‘‘ Chillingham
u bah
tT cf. conclusion of Preface to Ist vol. ‘‘ British Birds.”’
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS.: 359
interests between the editors .... the compilation
and completion of the present work devolved upon one
alone.’ He also acknowledges his obligations to the
Rev. H. Coates, the vicar of Bedlington, for “ literary
corrections.”
A facsimile title-page of the first volume of the first
edition of ‘“ British Birds” is here given, that of the
second volume is somewhat similar, but Beilby’s name
does not appear in it.
The collation of the book is as follows :—
Vol. 1; pp. XXX., title, preface, introduction and
contents, + pp. 335, -+ 117 figures of birds, and 91 tail-
pieces.
Vol. 2; pp. XX. -+ pp. 400, -+ 101 figures of birds, and
139 vignettes.
The first edition was printed on paper of three different
sizes, viz., imperial, royal, and demy 8vo, that of the latter
size being of two qualities, thick and thin. The publishing
prices were 21s., 18s., 13s., and 10s. 6d. respectively, and
of the imperial paper copies (of the first issue) only
twenty-four were printed. The prices of the second
volume being 24s., 18s., and 12s. Of the first volume
of the ‘“‘ British Birds’? there were two issues, both
bearing the same date, viz., 1797; the second issue being,
thowever, printed in 1798. The first issue may be
determined from the fact that on the reverse of page 335
the third edition of ‘‘ Bewick’s Quadrupeds ” is announced,
while in the second, the fourth is advertised.*
The success of the “ History of British Birds ”’ was
immediate and complete, six editions were issued in
Bewick’s lifetime, and in the year 1847, an eighth,f
edited by John Hancock with great skill, and containing
some twenty extra tail-pieces, which Bewick had
executed for a projected “ History of British Fishes,”
* For further particulars, cf. Newton, ‘* Dict. Birds,”’ Introd., p. 20.
+ Dates of the eight editions of Bewick’s ‘‘ Birds” are as follows :—
Ist, 1797-1804; 2nd, 1805; 3rd, 1809; 4th, 1816; 5th, 1821 (with
Supplement); 6th, 1826; 7th, 1832; 8th and last, 1847.
360 BRITISH BIRDS.
appeared, this edition being in many respects the best.
The “ Birds ” marked Bewick’s high-water mark as an
artist, the only book of any real importance which he
subsequently produced being ‘“‘ Aisop’s Fables,” in 1818.
As has above been mentioned, the value of the
‘“* History of British Birds ” rests on its wood-cuts alone,
and although it has been frequently stated that Bewick
had from his youth upwards a great leaning towards the
study of birds, a careful investigation seems to show that
he only possessed the ordinary interest in Nature common
to most intelligent boys brought up in the country; indeed,
on his own showing his chief delight as a youth consisted
in joining the local “‘ hunting parties,”’ and in observing
the habits of the various “ beasts of the chase.” It is
true that in his ‘“‘ Memoir” he makes some not infrequent
mentions of his early observations and interest in orni-
thology, and he further enlarges on this subject in the
preface to the sixth edition of his “ Birds”; but it was
only in human nature that a man who had seen edition
after edition of his ornithological writings eagerly
absorbed by the public, should come to consider himself
as a zoologist, both by inclination as well as study. Be
this as it may, the excellence of his wood-cuts* stands out
beyond all doubt or question, and the debt we owe to the
memory of Thomas Bewick is great and lasting.
Of the remainder of Thomas Bewick’s life we can here
make but the briefest mention. His wife (Isabella
Elhot, of Ovingdean), whom he had married in 1786, died
in 1826, and in November, 1828, at the ripe old age of
seventy-five, he followed her to the grave, and lies buried
by her side in Ovingham churchyard, ‘“ at the west end
of the church near the steeple.” He continued working
* Although Bewick seems to have been the first engraver to use
wood-blocks for the representation of birds with any signal success,
the process had, of course, been made use of on the Continent for that
purpose, while in this country it had already been employed in 1743 to
illustrate a work entitled ‘Ornithologia Nova: or a new General
History of Birds,” a second edition of which, with a somewhat different
title, appeared in 1745.
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 361
to the close of his busy life, and when seized with his.
fatal illness was engaged on a large block entitled, ‘‘ The
Old Horse waiting for Death.”
George Montagu, whose *“ Ornithological Dictionary ”
has already been referred to, as having been issued while
Bewick was engaged on the compilation of the second
volume of his “ Birds,” was born at lLackham, in
Wiltshire, in 1751. He entered the army at an early
age, and served as a captain in the 15th Regiment of Foot
during the American War. He afterwards settled down
at Easton Grey, in Wilts, and became acting colonel
of the County Militia. He died at Kingsbridge, in
Devonshire, in August, 1815. Montagu was a. prolific
writer,* but his reputation rests on his ‘‘ Ornithological
Dictionary,” a work so able and so well-known that it
is only necessary to say that its merits have been as widely
acknowledged abroad as at home; and to quote Coues’
dictum “‘It is one of the most notable treatises on
British Birds, as a vade mecum which has held its place at:
a thousand elbows for three-quarters of a century.”
The full title of the book is as follows :—
Ornithological Dictionary; / or, / Alphabetical
Synopsis / of / British Birds. / By / George Montagu,
F.L.S. / In two volumes, / Vol. I. [Vol. II.]. London: /
Printed for J. White, Fleet Street, / by T. Bensly, Bolt
Court. / 1802.
Two Vols. 8vo. Collation: Vol. I. pp. 2 un. + pp.
XLIII., -+ pp. un. (being sheets B-Y) + Slip of Errata.
Plate of Cirl Bunting. Vol. II., Title -- pp. un. (sheets.
B-Y) + Slip of Errata.
A supplement (unpaged) exceeding in bulk the two
volumes of the original edition, with 24 plates, was issued
by Col. Montagu in 1813; and there were numerous
editions and re-issues after his death.
* For alist of his works on Natural History vide *‘ Agassiz,’’ Vol. III.,.
p. 614.
( 362 )
MARKING BIRDS: NOTES ON THE WORK AT
THE ROSSITTEN STATION.
154
A. LANDSBOROUGH THOMSON.
From time to time references have been made in the
pages of British Brrps * to the work of the various
investigators who are endeavouring to obtain fuller and
more accurate data with regard to migration, by liberating
birds marked with metal foot-rings. It may be of in-
terest, however, to give a fuller account of the methods
employed, and of these I was able to gain some knowledge
during a couple of weeks’ stay last autumn (1908) at
Rossitten, on the Baltic. Some details of the results
cbtained there may indicate what may be looked for by
following similar lines of research.
A word about the situation of Rossitten: at the very
south-eastern corner of the Baltic, the River Niemen
(or Memel) flows through many mouths into a large
lagoon—the Kurisches Haff. This lagoon is connected
with the sea by a narrow channel at one end, and for the
remainder of its length is separated only by a tongue of
land, or Nehrung, about sixty miles long by from less
than half a mile to more than two miles broad. It is
among the “ wandering ”’ dunes—the highest in Kurope—
on the Kurische Nehrung, that the little out-of-the-way
fishing village of Rossitten lies. And it is there that the
German Ornithological Society has established its per-
manent Vogelwarte, or ornithological station. Lying
in the midst of a large tract of uninviting country, the
neighbourhood of Rossitten, combining as it does within
a small area, examples of many different types of country
—woods, meadows, sandy wastes, ponds, marshes, reed-
beds, open shore, and cultivated land—may be regarded
as a sort of oasis where vast numbers of resting mi-
* Vol. I., pp. 58, 298, 326; Vol. II., pp. 35, 171, 245, and 246,
A. L. THOMSON: MARKING BIRDS. 363
grants of widely different needs and habits congregate. So
great is the number of migrants passing along the Nehrung,
and so large the proportion that break their journey
at Rossitten, that, as a station from which to observe
migration, it is now regarded as rivalling, if not sur-
passing, the more famous Heligoland, being inferior only
in that it is less easily searched.
For five years now Dr. Thienemann, director of the
Vogelwarte, has been actively engaged in marking
birds at Rossitten. The mark employed
consists of a strip of aluminium bent into
the form of a ring, with the two ends pro-
jecting outwards together where they
meet, and fastened by folding one of
these ends over the other. The inscription
engraved on these rings varies with the
size of the ring. On the Crow and Gull sizes it reads :
“ Vogelwarte, Rossitten,” followed by a number. On
the larger sizes, for Storks, etc., ‘“‘ Germania,’ or even
‘** Ost-Preussen Germania,” is added. On the smaller
sizes, for Terns, small Waders, small Passerine birds,
etc., there is no room for anything except the number,
and consequently very little success has been obtained
with these birds. The difficulty lies entirely with the
finder of the bird—once sent in to the Vogelwarte it is
easy to tell whether the ring is a Rossitten one or not.
This indicates the need for a new pattern of ring for small
birds. Dr. Thienemann has rejected the idea of a metal
label attached to the ring; such a label would interfere
with the bird too much, and would create a doubt as
to whether results thus obtained could be regarded as
normal.
Birds are procured for marking at Rossitten in two
ways. A large number of birds are marked as nestlings,
not only at Rossitten, but also in other parts of East
Prussia. The other method is to capture resting
‘migrants, mark them, and then let them continue
their journey. Large numbers of Hooded Crows are
564 BRITISH BIRDS.
marked in this way every autumn. Huge flocks of these
birds pass along the Nehrung at this season, and large
numbers are ingeniously netted—and bitten to death (!)—
by the Rossitten natives, who preserve them for winter
food. Many of the birds thus caught uninjured are not
killed, but are sold alive to the Vogelwarte for marking
and liberation. About 8 per cent. of these marked Crows
are killed or recaptured by persons who send them, or
the rings and feet, or at least notice of the capture, to
Rossitten. This proportion of returns is far larger than
was originally expected, and it will probably come as
a surprise to many. The only other figures I have seen
are those quoted on p. 246 of this volume of BritisH
Brrps: the returns for a species so much shot as the
Woodcock are shown to be scarcely more than 5 per cent.
The insufficient “‘ address ” given on the rings in that case
must, however, be taken into account. It must also be
remembered that on the Continent the Hooded Crow has
almost the status of a ‘‘ game bird,” shooting Crows
decoyed by a captive Eagle-Owl being a recognised and
popular form of sport.
To show the value of bird-marking I conclude by giving
short summaries of the results obtained at Rossitten in
the case of a few species, beginning with the Hooded
Crow (Corvus cornix).
The places from which these Crows, marked while
stopping on migration at Rossitten, have been again
recorded, lie within a broad belt of country extending from
southern Finland and the St. Petersburg district of
Russia, southwards through Livonia and Courland to
Rossitten, and then westwards, still bounded on one side
by the Baltic, through northern Germany, and _ ter-
minating in the north-eastern corner of France (Solesmes).
The most northerly point from which one of these marked
birds has been recorded is Wiisala, in the Government
of St. Michel, Finland (April 20th, 1907: liberated
October 12th, 1905). From a large number of records
I select, as fairly representative of the whole series, those
Pa~
A. L. THOMSON: MARKING BIRDS. 365
of birds which were liberated—along with nearly a
hundred others not heard of again—at Rossitten on the
same day, October 4th, 1906.
DATE AND PLACE OF RECAPTURE.
Feb., 1907. Friedland, Mecklenburg-Strelitz,
9th April, 1907. Agilla, East Prussia.
12th April, 1907. Lalendorf, Mecklenburg-Schwerin.
14th May, 1907. Watnoden, Courland.
9th June, 1907. Rossitten.
12th Oct., 1907. Pernau, Livonia.
7th Dec., 1907. Crefeld, Rheinland.
There are some interesting records of birds marked
about the same time and again recorded about the same
time from the same place :—
MARKED AT ROSSITTEN. RECORDED AT AGILLA, FAST PRUSSIA,
4th Oct., 1906. 9th April, 1907.
8th Oct., 1906. 14th April, 1907.
RECORDED AT SARKAU, KURISCHE NEHRUNG.
9th Oct., 1904. 12th Oct., 1905.
20th Oct., 1904. 16th Oct., 1905.
The second couple of these records also shows that the
birds passed along the Nehrung at almost the same time
in the autumn of 1905 as in the previous season.
Three records which bear upon the time taken upon
migration, give rather different results :—
MARKED AT ROSSITTEN. DaTE AND PLACE OF RECAPTURE.
28th March, 1904. 31st March, 1904, Pillkoppen, Kur. Neh.
16th April, 1904. 17th April, 1904 (morning), Pillkoppen
(6.30 p.m.) (ca. six miles north-easterly from
Rossitten. )
18th April, 1904. 26th April, 1904, Peterhof, St. Petersb.
The fact that it was later in the season may account
for the much greater distance in proportion to the time,
in the last case than in the first.
566 BRITISH BIRDS.
The longest time, so far, between the liberation of a
marked Crow and its recapture, is four years and a week :
liberated at Rossitten, October 12th, 1903; shot at the
mouth of the Vistula, October 20th, 1907.
The proportion of marked birds again recorded is even
greater among the Gulls than among the Crows, but this
is partly explained by the commonness of gull-shooting
as a form of “sport”? on .the Continent. Moreover,
one of these larger-sized rings would be visible on a bird
at some distance. The proportions, as reckoned about
eighteen months ago, were 12.5 per cent. and 16.6 per cent.
for Herring-Gulls (Larus argentatus), and Common Gulls
(L. canus) respectively. One of the latter species marked
at Rossitten was obtained in the Far6es, so that it is
probable that some Rossitten birds may reach the
British Isles.
Although the proportion is smaller among the Black-
headed Gulls (L. ridibundus) the total number of returns
is greater as these birds are marked in large numbers
as nestlings in a colony at Rossitten. The records have
shown that, on the approach of winter the birds of this
colony cross Europe by two routes. One leads south-
wards, following the Vistula at first it is supposed, over
Vienna and Trieste to the Adriatic, where quite a number
have been recorded near the mouth of the Po. One, also,
has been obtained in the south of Italy, and a bird marked
on July 26th, 1907, was obtained near Tunis on January
12th, 1908. The other route follows the Baltic coast
westwards, crosses to the North Sea, follows the Rhine
upwards, and reaches the Mediterranean by the Lake of
Geneva and the valley of the Rhone.
Storks (Ciconia alba) have been marked in considerable
numbers, as nestlings, in East Prussia and elsewhere.
Among those returned are a few from different parts of
Africa. These include one of a brood of three marked
by Dr. Thienemann near Konigsberg on June 21st, 1906,
and one of a brood of three marked near KoOslin, in
Pomerania, on July 5th, 1907. The ringed foot of
A. L. THOMSON: MARKING BIRDS. 367
the first of these was brought by a native to a French
officer near Lake Chad in October, 1906. The other,
having left for the south on the 25th or 26th of August,
when it had been about a fortnight out of the nest, was
obtained that winter near Fort Jameson, in north-eastern
Rhodesia: the record came to Dr. Thienemann’s notice
through a note in the “ Field” for January 25th, 1908
(p. 150).
For reasons already explained the returns for the
smaller species are disappointing, but there are a few
isolated records of interest. A Dunlin (Tringa alpina),
for instance, was marked at Rossitten on September
5th, 1904, and recorded on the 22nd of the same month,
from the Arenholzer See in Schleswig- Holstein.
The director of the Vogelwarte earnestly requests that
anyone finding one of his marked birds, will send him
the ring and foot, or at least the ring, with full particulars
as to date and place of capture.*
* The Editors will be glad to forward any information - to
Dr. Thienemann, and to publish in these pages the data relating to the
capture of any marked birds in the British Islands.
( 368 )
ON THE MORE IMPORTANT ADDITIONS TO OUR
KNOWLEDGE OF BRITISH BIRDS SINCE 1899.
BY
H. F. WITHERBY ann N. F. TICEHURST.
Parr XIX.
(Continued from page 334.)
BLACK-NECKED GREBE Podicipes nigricollis C. L. Brehm.
S. page 723.
OXFORDSHIRE.—A pair shot on a large pond near Bloxham
on September 19th, 1899, were thought to have bred, or
attempted to breed, somewhere in the district (O. V. Aplin,
Ibis, 1902, p. 165, and Zool., 1903, p. 10).
It was reported by Mr. Aplin in 1904 that some well-known
ornithologists, who wished to remain anonymous, had
discovered that several pairs of these birds nested and reared
their young that year in Britain. The birds were on a shallow
lake surrounded with marshy ground. Early in June four
pairs were seen with one, two, two, and three young respec-
tively, in one part of the lake, while further off was a fifth
pair with rather larger young and two unattached adults
(O. V. Aplin, Zool., 1904, pp. 417-420). In 1906 Mr. Aplin
announced that he had himself been able to pay a visit to the
place, and had seen four or five adult birds in full breeding
plumage, but they had not at that time, he thought, yet
hatched their young (t.c., 1906, p. 315).
MirppLesex.—The plate in Sowerby’s “ British Miscellany ”
of a male and female Grebe with nest and eggs taken on a
pond on Chelsea Common in 1805, and ascribed by Mr. Harting
(Birds of Middlesex, p. 244, and Handbook, p. 269) to this
species, is stated by Mr. Aplin to represent Little Grebes in
summer plumage (Zool., 1904, p. 266).
CHESHIRE.—One was shot on Dee Marshes, near Chester,
in November, 1906 (A. Newstead, f.c., 1907, p. 153).
LaNcASHIRE.—An adult male in full summer plumage
was caught alive on a pond at Middleton, near Lancaster, on
July 28th, 1904 (H. W. Robinson, t.c., 1904, p. 350).
NortTHUMBERLAND.—Two seen in the middle of June were
in winter plumage (A. Chapman, birdlife of the Borders, 2nd ed.,
p- 94).
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 369
ScoTLaND.—One was shot at Lendalfoot (Ayr) on January
27th, 1906. The species had not previously been recorded
in the Clyde area (Ann. S.N.H., 1907, p. 207).
IRELAND.—A male “coming into summer plumage” was
shot on Belfast Lough on February 28th, 1907 (W. H. Work-
man, Zool., 1907, p. 111). Has been obtained in twenty-
four instances (R. J. Ussher, List of Irish Birds, p. 53).
Food.—In the stomach of one shot March 2nd, 1898, at
Strathbeg (Dee area), were found many feathers, amongst
which were numbers of a _ stalk-eyed crustacean | (ysis
vulgaris), showing that though killed on a loch, it had shortly
before been feeding in the sea (G. Sim, Vert. Fauna of Dee,
p..) 190).
STORM-PETREL Procellaria pelagica L. S. page 727.
BREEDING ON THE East Coast.—A pair, at first thought
to be Fork-tailed Petrels, but afterwards identified as of this
species, were found breeding on the Bass Rock in 1904 (H.N.
Bonar, Field, 1904, pp. 908 and 983; W. E. Clarke, Ann.
S.N.H., 1905, p. 55).
LEACH’S FORK-TAILED PETREL Oceanodroma leucorrhoa
(Viedll.). S. page 729.
Fuannan Isitanps (OuTER HEBRIDES).—Regarded as the
chief breeding stations of the species in the British Isles. On
Eilean Mor they are more plentiful than the Storm-Petrel.
They lay earlier—the first eggs being found on May 29th,
but their nesting habits are similar. The chicks are sooty-
black and much darker than those of the Storm-Petrel (W.
Eagle Clarke, Ann. S.N.H., 1905, p. 86).
IRELAND.—A very few have been found breeding on islands
off Mayo and Kerry (R. J. Ussher, List of I. Birds, p. 53).
MADEIRAN FORK-TAILED PETREL Oceanodroma castro
(Harcourt). S. page 731.
A female (the second British example) was shot near Hythe,
Kent, on November 8th, 1906, while flitting along the shore
in a tired manner after a heavy south-westerly gale (N. F.
Ticehurst, Bull. B.O.C., XIX., p. 20).
WILSON’S PETREL Oceanites oceanicus (Kuhl).
S. page 733.
[Surrey.—Four specimens in the Charterhouse Collection
are said to have been killed on Godalming Pease Marsh, after
370 BRITISH BIRDS.
a very severe storm, but no dates are given, and Mr. Bucknill
does not consider them to be sufficiently authenticated (J. A.
Bucknill, B. of Surrey, p. 352).]
GREAT SHEARWATER Puffinus gravis (O'Reilly).
S. page 737.
Scitty Istus.—A fairly regular visitor in flocks during
autumn and winter to the seas around the islands. Never
seen among the islands (J. Clark and F. R. Rodd, f.c., 1906,
p. 346).
SuFFOLK.—One was obtained off Lowestoft in November,
1898 (T. Southwell, Knowledge, 1899, p. 41).
LINCOLNSHIRE.—About November 27th, 1902, a male was
shot near the mouth of the River Welland (F. L. Blathwayt,
Zool., 1903, p. 30).
YORKSHIRE.—Autumn, 1904, a female at Scarborough.
A number of examples obtained prior to 1899 are also detailed
(T. H. Nelson, B. of Yorks., p. 754).
ScorLanp.—On June 27th, 1894, between the Butt of Lewis
and North Rona forty to sixty pairs were seen, “ nearly each
pair sitting [on the water] lovingly together.”” On June 24th,
1895, between Barra Head and St. Kilda over fifty pairs were
seen sitting on the sea in pairs. A specimen was killed by a
fisherman on August 7th, 1897, and two others in the fourth
week of July, 1899, near St. Kilda (Alfred Newton, Ann.
S.N.H., 1900, pp. 142-147). One was obtained from a small
flock in the Summer Islands, Loch Broom,on October 31st,
1897 (J. T. Henderson, f.c., 1906, p. 114). A few were
seen off the Flannans on September 21st, 1904 (W. E. Clarke,
t.c., 1905, p. 86).
TRELAND.—In September, 1900, when cruising off the coasts
of Kerry, Cork, and Waterford, Mr. H. Becher found this
species surprisingly numerous ; on several days he saw eight
or ten (R. J. Ussher, J. Nat., 1901, pp. 42-43). On September
9th, 1901, the same observer sailed into a flock of two to three
hundred of these birds between Cape Clear and Mizen Head
and shot four. On September 13th he again saw large numbers,
both off Valentia and between the Blaskets and Skelligs (id.,
t.c., 1905, p. 48). In 1906 Mr. G. P. Farran saw many in
August off co. Kerry, and on November Ist off co. Cork ; and
several on November 6th off co. Kerry (id., t.c., 1907, pp. 163
and 184). In 1907 the same observer saw off the same coast
many in August, a few in September, several in November,
and in 1908 two in August and many in November (id., t.¢.,
1909, p. 80).
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 371
Moult and Habits.—In the specimens recorded above under
Scotland, as taken in July and August, Professor Newton
found that the primaries were all new and only partially grown,
and he concludes that the birds were practically incapable of
flight (loc. cit.). The birds observed in June, 1894, were
subsequently seen by Mr. H. L. Popham, who reports that
“there were no young birds amongst them, but the old birds
could scarcely fly, having apparently moulted out their
primaries ”’ (cf. Trans. Roy. Irish Acad., XX XI., Pt. III., p. 72).
Howard Saunders, in replying to a question of Newton’s as
to the statement in the “‘ Manual” that this bird strikes the
water with great violence on alighting, gives as his authority
Captain J. W. Collins, who had had remarkable opportunities
for observing this species on the American fishing banks.
The habit had also been observed by Mr. R. Warren (cf.
Zool., 1894, p. 22). Mr. Saunders further remarks that Captain
Collins stated that the primaries and other flight-feathers
of this species were shed and renewed somewhat abruptly
from the end of June to the latter part of July, and that
Baron d’Hamonville had drawn attention to the rapid moult
of the flight-feathers in the Manx Shearwater (Howard
Saunders, t.c., 1901, pp. 15-18).
SOOTY SHEARWATER Puffinus griseus (J. F. Gm.).
S. page 739.
CoRNWALL.—One was shot near Looe on August 21st, 1899
(J. Clark, Zool., 1907, p. 287).
YORKSHIRE.—*‘ Now known to be a fairly regular visitant
to the Yorkshire coast in autumn and winter” (T. H. Nelson,
B. of Yorks., p. 756). Records since 1899 :—A male and
female October 2nd, 1901, one October Ist, one October 4th,
1904, all off Scarborough (W. J. Clarke, Zool., 1901, p. 477,
1905, p. 74). Others reported in 1904 off Flamborough and
Bridlington (T. H. Nelson, t.c., p. 758). Mr. Clarke also in-
forms us that he obtained another example also off the coast
of Scarborough on October 6th, 1908.
KENT AND SUSSEX, cf. supra, p. 243.—Three recent occur-
rences.
ScoTLAND.—A female was captured in Stromness Harbour
on October 16th, 1902. Of extreme rareness in Scottish seas,
this bird is new to the fauna of the Orkneys (W. E. Clarke,
Ann. S.N.H., 1903, p. 25). In the mouth of the Firth of
Forth Mr. William Evans is disposed to consider it “a fairly
regular, though usually far from common, autumn visitant.”’
It appears that only two specimens have been preserved, but
372 BRITISH BIRDS.
Mr. Evans bases his opinion on his own personal observations
and those of fishermen who know the bird well, and have
frequently seen it, though usually in small numbers. In
1902 it appears to have been specially numerous, about a
dozen being seen at one time (W. Evans, f.c., 1903, pp. 26-28).
IRELAND.—A good many were seen during September, 1900,
by Mr. H. Becher when cruising off the coasts of Kerry, Cork,
and Waterford (R. J. Ussher, J. Nat., 1901, pp. 42-43). Great
numbers were seen by the same observer in September, 1901,
and four were shot. ‘‘ The observations of Mr. Becher in
1892, 1899, 1900 and 1901, go to show that both [Great and
Sooty] these oceanic species may be met with in August and
September off the south-west extremity of Ireland, and some-
times in considerable numbers.’”’ One was shot off Achill
Island on May 22nd, 1901 (2d., t.c., 1905, p. 43).
MANX SHEARWATER Puffinus anglorum (Temm.).
S. page 741.
Scitty Istanps.—Breeds on Annett in “ prodigious
numbers ” (J. Clark and F. R. Rodd, Zool., 1906, p. 346).
NortH Wa.eEs.—Bardsey Island.—Mr. O. V. Aplin in 1901
found a considerable breeding colony on the north-east end
of the island (f.c., 1902, p. 16), and they undoubtedly breed
on the mainland of West Carnarvonshire (idem, t.c., 1900,
p- 505).
IRELAND.—On June 18th, 1904,when crossing from Liverpool
to Belfast, Mr. R. Lloyd Patterson saw a large assemblage
of between 150 and 200 in the early morning a few miles off
the Skullmartin Lightship, near the coast of co. Down (Irish
Nat., 1904, p. 171).
The September migrations of this species are deserving of
closer study than they appear to have received. There are a
number of scattered records referring to these migrations but
they are not sufficiently continuous to allow of any conclusion
being drawn from them.
LEVANTINE SHEARWATER Puffinus yelkouanus (Acerbi).
S. page 741.
The occurrences of this species have already been dealt with
(antea, pp. 138, 206-208, 313). Mr. T. H. Nelson points out
that in the ‘‘ Birds of Yorkshire’ it is recorded that three
examples were obtained in 1904 (only two were mentioned on
p. 207), but no details are given.
MDDIFIONS-~ SINCE “1899: 373
LITTLE DUSKY SHEARWATER Puffinus assimilis Gould.
S. page 743.
Puffinus obscurus bailloni, Bp., Rothschild and Hartert,
Nov. Zool., VI. (1899), p. 196.
Puffinus baillont, Bp., Godman, Monograph Petrels, pp.
138-141.
Messrs. Rothschild and Hartert separate the Australian
form P. assimilis from the African form P. bailloni, and
Dr. Godman, who coincides in this view, states that in the
latter bird the quill-lining is greyish, or ashy-white, and not
of such a pure white as in P. assimilis, while the lateral feathers
of the under tail-coverts are more or less black along their
outer webs and not entirely white as in P. assimilis. Dr.
Godman considers that the British examples are referable to
the Madeiran form.
The third British example was a female picked up exhausted
on the beach near Bexhill during the severe gale from the
W.S.W. on December 28th, 1900. The bird was shown to
belong to the form P. obscurus bailloni (W. R. Butterfield,
Bull B:0:C., Xl», p. 45).
The fourth example—a male—was caught alive near Lydd,
Kent, after the disastrous south-westerly gale of November
26th—-27th, 1905 (N. F. Ticehurst, t.c., XVI., p. 38).
BULWER’S PETREL Bulweria bulweri (Jard. and Selby).
S. page 749.
The second British example was picked up dead near Beachy
Head, Sussex, on February 3rd, 1903, after a succession of
strong south-westerly gales (N. F. Ticehurst, Bull. B.O.C.,
XW po).
The third—a female—was found dead on the shore near
St. Leonard’s-on-Sea, Sussex, on February 4th, 1904, also
after prolonged south-westerly gales (W. R. Butterfield, t.c.,
XV: p: 49).
The fourth, vide antea, p. 282.
FULMAR Fulmarus glacialis (L.). S. page 751.
Breeding Stations.
FLannAN Is_es.—Reported as breeding (J. A. Harvie-
Brown, Ann. S.N.H., 1903, p. 19). A few pairs have bred
on the outer islands for several years, and in 1904 two couples
had nests on Eilean Mor (W. E. Clarke, #.c., 1905, p. 86).
374 BRITISH BIRDS.
Barra.—Birds were seen in 1899, and in 1902 eggs were
actually seen, while in 1906 there were from eight to twelve
pairs breeding (N. B. Kinnear, f.c., 1907, p. 85).
SUTHERLANDSHIRE.—In 1897 Fulmars were seen on June
19th and 30th by Mr. Eagle Clarke about a mile to the east of
Cape Wrath, and again at the same place on July 10th, 1900,
by Mr. Howard Saunders, and they both considered that the
birds were then nesting there (Ann. S.N.H., 1897, p. 254,
1901, p. 50). A colony was established during 1901 (or
possibly a year sooner 7), 1902, and 1903 on Handa (ef.
J. A. Harvie-Brown, Fauna N.W. Highlands and Skye,
pp. 355-361, where a very full account of the extension of
this bird’s range in Scotland and its status up till 1904 will
be found).
CaITHNESS.—First observed at Dunnet Head in 1900.
Have gradually increased in numbers since. About thirty
pairs there now (J. A. Harvie-Brown, Ann. S.N.H., 1907,
pits):
SHETLANDS.—In 1903 there were eight or nine actually
occupied nesting sites (J. A. Harvie-Brown, Fauna N.W.
Highlands and Skye, p. 359). Fair Isle-—In 1902 it was
present during the summer: in 1903 about a dozen pairs
bred, since which it has thoroughly established itself (W.
E. Clarke, t.c., 1906, p. 80). Whalsay and Yell.—Found
breeding in 1906 (J. S. Tulloch, t.c., 1906, p. 240). Futful
Head.—A pair or two first seen in 1900, now (1905) about
thirty pairs nesting (N. B. Kinnear, t.c., 1905, p. 246).
OrKNEyS.—A number building nests June 8th, 1901 (t.c.,
1902, p. 199). Since 1891 two localities in Orkney, one of
which is Hoy Head, have been occupied (J. A. Harvie-
Brown, Fauna N.W. Highlands and Skye). Thirty or forty
nests in 1901 at Hoy Head; over fifty in 1902 (Ann. S.N.H.,
1904, p. 94). Several pairs were discovered during the summer
of 1907 frequenting the cliffs between Stromness and the
Bay of Skaill, in Orkney. This is believed to be the first
record from this locality (J. Walpole-Bond, Country Side, 7,
5 ai Gr LTR
In connection with the very marked and steady increase of
this bird as a breeding species in Scotland, it should be
remarked that a great increase has taken place in its numbers
in the St. Kilda group, and this may partly account for the
establishing of new nesting colonies (cf. J. A. Harvie-Brown,
Ann. 8.N.H., 1903, p. 19): .
ITRELAND.—“‘ Frequently met with at all seasons on the
Atlantic . . . . rarely comes to land” (R. J. Ussher, last
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 375
of I. Birds, p. 54). In 1906 Mr. G. P. Farran saw a few off
co. Cork on November Ist, off co. Kerry on November 6th
(id., t.c., 1907, p. 163), while he also noticed them in May and
August of the same year, and in 1907 in February (i.c., p. 184),
May (a few), August (many), September (a few), November
(many), and in 1908, in January and February (many), August
(many), November (a few), (é.c., 1909, p. 80).
x *, This instalment takes us to the end of the “‘ Manual,”
and our task of collecting the more important additions to
the second edition will be completed next month by an article
detailing the omissions from, and corrections of, our
‘“‘additions.”’ We shall be extremely obliged for notes of such
omissions and corrections which may have been detected by our
readers, and these should be sent in net later than April 12th.
(To be continued.)
NOTES FROM SUSSEX.
GREY WacraiL (Motacilla melanope).—This species nests
regularly in north and west Sussex, probably in the east of
the county, where Dr. C. B. Ticehurst found a brood in 1906,
and probably also in other parts of Sussex, though very
locally, and in no great numbers. For three years in suc-
cession, 1906-07-08, I have found the nest (two in 1908) in
the two former areas.
Hopsy (Falco subbuteo).—Twice certainly within the past
few years has the Hobby bred in Sussex. At the time of
writing “‘ Sussex Hobbies,” which was published in ‘‘ Country
Side” on February Ist, 1908, detailing the finding of an eyrie
on June 15th of the previous year, I was under the impression
that this was actually the first record. So it is as far as the
notifying of the fact goes, but careful inquiries have elicited
the information that in 1906 a brood was taken off in a totally
different part of the county to where I found my eyrie. In
1907 (the year in which I found it) I also located a second
pair, but both birds vanished entirely from the wood they
were frequenting. Probably they were destroyed. In 1906
a pair meant settling down in a Heron’s old nest, but before
the eggs were laid the male was mercilessly shot. On June
17th, 1908, I saw a single bird in a certain district in the north
of the county.
Common SHELD-Dvuck (Tadorna cornuta).—The Sheld-Duck
nests in one spot in Sussex for certain, in the extreme south-
west coast corner of the county. I visited the place on May
6th, 1908, and saw one pair of birds. The young were seen in
1906 and 1907 by Mr. Padwick—a capital observer.
SHOVELER (Spatula clypeata)—On April 18th, 1908, I
discovered the Shoveler’s nest in the north of Sussex. This
is the first record for the county. The following is an extract
from my diary for that day :—‘ As I left a withy bed at the
tail of the big mill-pond a pair of Shovelers, easily recognised
as such by the drake’s plumage. chanced to be flying towards
me over the water. This was the first year I had ever seen
them here. Making a circuit they both settled by the second
withy bed, half-way up the reach, where, by the aid of glasses
and a careful stalk, I could study them to perfection.*
* A full description of the birds, both in flight and at rest, here
follows but has been omitted for want of space. — Eps.
NOTES. 377
‘“ Knlisting the services of the keeper I proceeded to hunt
for the nest, which I was confident was somewhere near.
The area of this mill-pond is a wide one, and there is much
possible ground encircling it. But bearing in mind my
experiences of the Shoveler in the north Kent marshes, where
I had studied it very closely, I at once looked upon a stretch
of rough grass adjoining the water and lying between the two
withy beds as the most likely place for success. Taking the
piece in beats the keeper and myself worked the place care-
fully. Suddenly the keeper stopped and held up his hand.
I knew he had something ; and he had—the Shoveler’s nest.
It was about thirty paces from the margin of the pond, and
placed between three tufts of ordinary grass, and then only
held two eggs partially covered with bits of grass. As it
happens so often at this stage of laying, there was not a shred
of down, though of course the size and colour of the eggs, as
well as the size of the nest, betokened the Shoveler.”’ Five
days later, however, there was down in the nest, and this with
the feathers amongst it set the matter beyond dispute.
Thirteen eggs were ultimately laid, but unfortunately they
were deserted owing to the heavy snowstorm at the end of
April.
Ferrucinous Duck (Fuligula nyroca).—For nearly the
whole afternoon of March 20th, 1908, I watched three
Ferruginous Ducks on a certain mill-pond in the north of
Sussex. Luck is with me over this species, because in 1903,
on April 19th, Mr. Gwynne-Vaughan and myself identified
three on the Wye at Builth Wells, Breconshire, at really close
quarters.
J. WALPOLE-Bonp.
RARE BIRDS IN PEMBROKESHIRE.
GREY PHALAROPE (Phalaropus fulicarius).—I shot a bird
of this species that was swimming about a duck-pond within
fifty yards of a private house in the neighbourhood of
Haverfordwest on December 6th, 1908. The pond is about
one and a half miles from the sea, and there are no sand or
mud-flats within about ten miles. This is quite an uncommon
bird in this county, and I[ only know of two stuffed specimens.
Common Birrern (Botaurus stellaris).—Mr. Jeffery, taxider-
mist, of Haverfordwest, informs me that he had one to stuff
this winter, shot near St. David’s.
On January 23rd I was one of a party of seven guns who
had a splendid view of a Bittern standing quite motionless,
with head and beak at an angle of about 45°, in some tall
378 BRITISH BIRDS.
yellow rushes on the lake at Stackpole Court, a residence of
Earl Cawdor. The head-keeper there informed me that
one or two appear regularly every winter. >
Nutuatcu (Sitta cesia).—This bird is reputed to be ex-
ceedingly rare in this county, but has either been overlooked
or has lately become commoner. At the end of November
I saw a bird of this species in the grounds of Picton Castle,
and on March 7th I saw one in the grounds of Hean Castle,
Saundersfoot. At both of these places there are a good
number of old and large trees, the exception in this exposed
and windswept county.
W. MairLtanp CONGREVE.
BIRD PROTECTION IN YORKSHIRE.
THe Wild Birds and Eggs Protection Committee of the
Yorkshire Naturalists’ Union are this season placing a special
watcher at Hornsea Mere to protect the rarer birds nesting
there. They have for several years employed a watcher on -
Spurn Point during the nesting season, with good effect, as
was shown in Mr. Oxley Grabham’s article in our last number.
—Ebs.
THE BIRDS OF KENT.
As some of our readers may be aware Dr. Norman F.
Ticehurst has for many years been studying the birds of Kent
with a view to writing a history of the avifauna of the county.
Dr. Ticehurst informs us that his manuscript is now complete,
and that he intends to publish the work forthwith. The book
is to be offered to subscribers, and the edition is to be limited.
For many reasons Kent is an extremely important county
ornithologically, and an adequate history of the Kent avifauna
has long been needed. We have every confidence that Dr.
Ticehurst’s work will be one of exceptional merit, and will
take an honourable place in the splendid roll of the local
avifaunas of our islands.—EDs.
BLACK-THROATED THRUSH IN KENT.
On February Ist, 1909, Mr. G. Bristow, taxidermist, of St.
Leonard’s-on-Sea, brought to me in the flesh a male specimen
of the Black-throated Thrush (Z'urdus atrigularis Temm.),
which had been shot by a man named Fuller on the previous
Saturday (January 30th) at Newenden,in Kent. The bird was
killed on the Kentish side of the River Rother, which separates
NOTES. _ 379
the two counties of Kent and Sussex. This, so far as we know,
is the third example of this Siberian Thrush which has been
obtained in Great Britain.
The first was killed near Lewes, in Sussex, on December
23rd, 1869, and was bought by the late Mr. T. J. Monk from
the man, a bricklayer, who had just shot it, and was at the
time Mr. Monk met him, carrying the bird in his hand. I
have often had the story from Mr. Monk’s own lips. After
Male Black-throated Thrush shot at Newenden, Kent, on
January 30th, 1909.
Mr. Monk’s death, the rarest of the birds in his collection
were, through Mr. A. F. Griffith, obtained for the Booth
Museum at Brighton, and amongst them was this specimen
of 7’. atrigularis.
For the second recorded specimen obtained in Great Britain,
Mr. J. A. Harvie-Brown kindly draws my attention to the one
now in the Perth Museum, which was shot in February, 1879,
on the banks of the Tay, and originally recorded by Col.
380 BRITISH BIRDS.
Drummond-Hay (cf. Trans. Perth Soc. Nat. Sciences, Vol. L.,
pp. 185-138 ; see also bis, 1889, p. 579).
Mr. H. E. Dresser in his “ Manual of Palearctic Birds ”
gives the habitat of this species as Asia, north to the Obi
and northern Yenesej, south to the Altai and Turkestan,
east to Lake Baikal; in winter migrating south to Assam,
northern India, Baluchistan, and Afghanistan ; has occurred
in Europe as a rare straggler in the Caucasus, Hungary,
Austria, Germany, Denmark, Belgium, and France and Great
Britain. Mr. Dresser also informs us that “it has been found
breeding in the Altai Range, and at Imbatskaya, on the
Yenesei River,” and that it lays four to six eggs, which vary
considerably, some resembling the ordinary type of the
Blackbird, whereas others more resemble those of the Mistle-
Thrush, but have the ground-colour of a deeper blue.
THOMAS PARKIN.
CURIOUS NESTING SITE OF A WOOD-WARBLER.
WHILE walking along a road on June 5th, 1908, I saw a Wood-
Warbler (Phylloscopus sibilatrix) with a mouthful of green
grass. Being curious to know what it would do with it, I
watched a few seconds. While looking, another Wood-
Warbler came up with a white insect in its beak and, strange
to say, entered a rabbit-hole on a perpendicular bank, not
five yards from me, and in full view. It remained in the hole
out of sight for several seconds, and then came out without the
insect. I went nearer to see into the rabbit-hole, when both
birds flew within a foot of my head, fluttering and tumbling
about, and uttering the usual alarm note. On looking into
the hole I could see nothing, so put in my hand, and out
flew six little Wood-Warblers and joined their parents. The
nest was exactly twelve inches down the hole, and was quite
invisible from its mouth. The nest was not domed as usual.
It may be interesting to note also that this particular bird was
first heard by me near the spot where I subsequently found
the nest, on May 6th, and I think it arrived on that day. The
young flew out of the nest on June 8th: this seems quick
work. Another peculiarity about this pair of birds was that
the cock omitted the preliminary “chit, chit,’ and uttered
only the second part of the ordinary shivering song—the trill,
which was very loud and very prolonged, in some cases lasting
fifteen seconds.
Subsequent observation revealed the fact that the bird
with the mouthful of grass referred to above was building a
ai
NOTES. 381
second nest, while the other bird of the pair was feeding six
young in the first nest. The second nest was also in the hole,
not so far in as the first (only about six inches), but quite
invisible when one looked on to the face of the bank. This
nest was also not domed.
W. 8S. MEDLIcorTT.
[Mr. Medlicott very kindly sent us the nest in question, and
we have submitted it and the note to the Rev. F. C. R.
Jourdain, who mentions the following abnormal sites :—
Nest under shelter of a root of a tree (cf. Zool., 1896, p. 375).
Nest in a diagonal cleft in the perpendicular face of a big
square boulder found in North Wales, May 21st, 1904 (O. V.
Aplin, in litt. to F. C. R. J.).
Mr. Jourdain adds :—*‘ The date (June 5th) is a very early
one for young to be able to leave the nest. The eggs are
usually laid about May 16th to 26th, often not till the end
of May. This record seems to imply that the birds would
have reared a second brood. Of this I have no previous
evidence, and should consider it unlikely, as the Wood- Warbler
is a late breeder.”—EDs. |
CHAFFINCH BREEDING IN WINTER.
I was surprised to hear that a pair of Chaffinches (Fringilla
celebs) had nested and reared a brood during the past winter
at Churchstoke, Montgomeryshire. Being sceptical I in-
quired into the matter. I found the report quite correct ; the
nest—undoubtedly a Chaffinch’s—being now in my possession.
It was in a sycamore, twelve feet above the ground, and is
made mainly of wool, with a few bits of lichen outside. The
Chaffinches built during the mild weather, in December,
and both parents were seen repeatedly at or about the nest,
and were observed feeding the young on February 20th.
Mr. G. Mountford, the master, and one of the boys in Church-
stoke School, kindly furnished me with the above details.
H. E. Forrest.
ALPINE SWIFT IN PEMBROKESHIRE.
An Alpine Swift (Cypselus melba) was shot on November 20th,
1908, on the land of Colonel Mirehouse on the east side of
Angle Bay, Pembrokeshire. The gamekeeper said that he
had seen a pair of them in the neighbourhood for some time
previously.
CHARLES J. P. CAVE.
582 BRITISH BIRDS
[In connection with the above record we have received
further interesting particulars from Lieut. W. Maitland
Congreve, R.A., who writes as follows :—‘ The bird was shot
by one of a number of guns (who nearly all fired at the bird,
thinking it was a Hawk), the guests of Colonel Mirehouse.
The bird was sent to Mr. W. E. de Winton, of Orielton, who
at once pronounced it to be an Alpine Swift. It is now
stuffed and in the possession of Colonel Mirehouse, and I saw
it some weeks ago. The bird is particularly remarkable
for the enormous span of the wings. The back is of a dull
brown colour; throat white, then a brown band and belly
white. It is not in the least like an ordinary Swift, owing
to the white, its size, and the span of its wings.’”’—Eps. |
DOWNY WOODPECKER (DEN DROCOPUS
PUBESCENS) IN GLOUCESTERSHIRE.
On January 14th, 1908, a friend who occasionally shoots
birds for me brought me in a little Woodpecker that he had
shot that day at Frampton Cotterel, near Bristol. It was
climbing up the trunk of an old apple tree some five feet from
the ground when shot. I supposed it to be simply a Lesser
Spotted Wcodpecker, and so labelled it, and it was only after
sending the skin to Mr. Marsden, of Tunbridge Wells, last
month, that the bird was discovered to be a specimen of the
North American Downy Woodpecker (D. pubescens).
Won. A. SMALLCOMBE.
[In connection with this record we have received the follow-
ing letter from Mr. H. W. Marsden :—‘** Amongst some Wood-
peckers I received from Mr. Smallcombe there were a male
and female, supposed to be Dendrocopus minor. The day I
got them I was very busy, and sent on the two skins to the
Hon. N. C. Rothschild. He handed them, without examina-
tion, to Messrs. Rowland Ward, to be remade, and it was by
them the bird was identified as Dendrocopus pubescens.
Mr. Smallcombe is quite a young ornithologist, and had
probably never seen a foreign skin of D. pubescens.”
Both Mr. Marsden and Messrs. Rowland Ward have satistied
us that this skin was undoubtedly not of American origin
(we had suggested that the label might have been inadvertently
changed), and that the bird was in fact shot in Gloucester-
shire. The record is an interesting one, but we cannot believe
that this North American Woodpecker crossed the Atlantic
unaided, and we think that the bird must have escaped from
captivity.—Eps].
NOTES. 385
WHITE-TAILED EAGLE IN ESSEX.
We could distinctly notice a White-tailed or Sea-Eagle
(Halactus albicilla) soaring over this park (Weald Hall,
Brentwood) at midday on Saturday, February 6th. It was
high up and being mobbed by a smaller bird, which I could
not distinguish. I could see the Kagle quite clearly through
field-glasses. It kept wheeling quietly round for nearly half-
an-hour, and then disappeared.
CHRISTOPHER J. H. Towrr.
OSPREY IN ESSEX.
AN Osprey (Pandion haliactus) appeared in this park (Weald
Hall, Brentwood) from October 11th till the 24th, 1903.
When it first came it was very tame, coming and taking some
golden carp out of a pond in the garden, where some gardeners
were at work. Afterwards it generally took up a position
on the dead bough of a tree on an island in the lake, where it
was generally mobbed by rooks, for whom, however, it seemed
to have a supreme contempt. There is absolutely no doubt
about its identity. It was of course protected, and notice
was given about so that it should not be shot.
An Osprey, presumably the same bird with more mature
plumage, came again the following year, staying about a
week.
CHRISTOPHER J. H. Tower.
POCHARD NESTING IN NORTH KENT.
On April 29th, 1907, I found a nest of the Pochard (Puligula
ferina) on the marshes in the north of Kent, in a’ district which
need not be precisely specified. This is the first authenticated
nest found in the county, and the only other that I am aware
of was discovered a year afterwards by Major R. Sparrow
in the south-west of Kent (cf. antea, p. 96). For several days
before the actual discovery of the nest [had seen and watched
closely two pairs of Pochards. One afternoon as a small
tongue of rough ground infringing on one of the “ fleets ”
(as all dykes are termed in Kent) was being worked for a
Shoveler’s nest, a duck Pochard clattered cumbrously from
a thick screen of reeds. The fact that she was alone
suggested the possibility of a nest; and next morning on
wading into the reed-bed, a duck Pochard again rose, not more
than ten paces from the bank, from a swampy ridge of soil
plastered with aquatic plants partitioning the “ fleet.” On
584 BRITISH BIRDS.
this natural groyne was the nest, which, although very
exposed, was not visible from the “ mainland,’ but I
marvelled greatly that it had escaped the prying eyes of the
Crows. Facing the reeds growing in the deep backwater
opposite, it was secured under the lea of a large spread-eagled
tuft of extremely coarse sword-like grass, and was built up
from the ooze beneath to a height of five inches. It was a
moist affair of freshly-plucked green grass, flat shreds of
dried grass, fragments of reed, sedge and water-weeds, finished
off with a few wisps of green grass. To some extent it
resembled a Coot’s nest, though it was not so utterly exposed
as most nests of that species. There was a well-trodden sloping
platform, or “slide,” of vegetation about a foot long and
seven inches wide leading up to the nest from the water. It
was then, as above cited, only April 29th, far too early for
a full clutch of Pochard’s eggs, and there were but two in the
nest. These were uncovered and cold, for, of course, their
owner had merely been standing by them. But their shape,
size, and coloration, not to mention the presence of the bird,
the disposition of the nest, and a few tufts of down, settled
their identity beyond quibble.
J. WALPOLE-BOND.
THE FOOD OF THE EIDER.
In a note in our last issue (p. 344) on this subject we
made Mr. Robinson say that it was curious that Razor-shells
were never found in birds killed in the early morning.
Mr. Robinson points out that he wrote that these shells ‘‘ may
often be found in Eiders shot at any time except early
morning.” By this, he now tells us, he merely meant that the
shells were not present before the birds had breakfasted, and
not, as we inferred, that the birds do not feed on these
shell-fish in the early morning.—Ebs.
GOOSANDER IN BEDFORDSHIRE.
On February 27th, 1909, I saw a female Goosander (Mergus
merganser) amongst the ducks on one of our ponds at Woburn.
The bird has often been recorded in Bedfordshire, but it is
perhaps sufficiently rare to be worthy of mention.
M. BEDFORD.
RED GROUSE AND BLACK GROUSE HYBRIDS.
Ir would be natural to suppose that species which are
closely allied and which frequent the same ground would often
interbreed ; but such is not the case. It is well known that
“STRIITIN °D “f JO UOTZDeT[OD 8Y} UT MON
qsnsny ‘seTeA\ YON ‘“epeg azeou yoys ‘pruqAH{ esnory poy pue Yyowlg olvewuoey omyeuruy
<¢. . ¢
AS
$32
ee
5386 BRITISH BIRDS.
Black Grouse and Capercaillie frequently interbreed, and
there are four or more known instances of hybrids between
such diverse species as the Pheasant and the Capercaillie, but
crosses between Black Grouse and Red Grouse, or Red Grouse
and Ptarmigan, are extremely rare. Mr. J. A. Jones spoke
to me one day concerning some Grouse which he and his
son had killed at Llanerch bog, near Bala, North Wales, in
August, 1908. On examination they proved to be undoubted
hybrids between Black and Red Grouse. All the seven
young birds in the covey were killed, but only two
were preserved; these exhibit very clearly the characteristics
of both parents. The back, wings, and _ scapulars are
similar to those of the immature Black Grouse, whilst
the new plumage, coming in on the breast and flanks,
is like that of the *‘ White’ form of the Red Grouse, being
deep chestnut and black widely tipped with white. ‘The
feet, legs, and forked tail are similar to those of the larger
parent. Neither of the parent birds was seen. It seems a
great pity that the whole covey was destroyed, for had any
reached maturity they would have been very beautiful and
interesting birds, quite dissimilar to the other specimens of
this hybrid that I have seen.
Mr. H. E. Forrest, in ‘‘ The Vertebrate Fauna of North
Wales,” states (p. 107) that he has seen what appears to be a
hybrid between the Black and the Red Grouse in the posses-
sion of Mr. Foster of Bettws-y-Coed; the specimen was shot
at Yspythy Moor on the 20th of November, 1897. Mr. Foster
also procured a similar specimen on the 9th of December,
1895.
By the kindness of Mr. J. A. Jones I was enabled to exhibit
the two specimens referred to above—a male and female—at
the meeting of the British Ornithologists’ Club, held on
January 20th last. .
J. G. Mitats.
AN immature male of the hybrid between the Red Grouse and
Black Grouse was killed on October 6th, 1908, by Mr. F. W.
Stobart, in Glen Troot, Kirkcudbrightshire, where Black Grouse
are extremely plentiful. It was shot during a drive when
flying in company with four Red Grouse. The bird is exactly
of the same type as the two adult males already in the
British Museum (one of these was one of two adult males killed
at Millden, Forfarshire, on October Ist, 1900, by Mr. J. L.
Cadwalader, while the other, presented by Lord Tweedmouth,
bears no particulars regarding its capture), but it still retains
NOTES. 387
a considerable amount of the first plumage, particularly on
the sides of the head and neck, where the feathers are mostly
light reddish-buff barred with black. The bill is large and
rather coarse, and the basal portions of the toes are feathered
as in the Red Grouse, while the terminal portions are naked
and pectinate on the sides as in the Black Grouse. Mr. Stobart
has kindly presented the specimen to the British Museum, and
I had the pleasure of exhibiting it at the February meeting of
the British Ornithologists’ Club. I havea further communica-
tion from Mr. Stobart saying that his keeper in Kirkcud-
bright has examined at close range a second example of this
hybrid on the same ground with some Red Grouse.
Another male example of this rare hybrid has also been
offered to the British Museum by Mr. G. Ashley Dodd, but
has not yet been received.
W. R. OGILVIE-GRANT.
THE BILL OF THE GREAT NORTHERN DIVER.
In the March number of Bririsu Brrps there is a reference
to the White-billed Northern Diver. For the last three years
I have had opportunities of watching large numbers of Great
Northern Divers (Colymbus glacialis) in the Outer Hebrides
in the end of October and beginning of November. At that
time none of the birds had attained their full winter plumage,
and the neck bands were in every case easily detected, but in
nearly the whole of them the lower mandible was ivory-
coloured, and the upper mandible partially so. The bill
of C. adamsi is so remarkably “ up-turned”’ that it would
be a far safer guide in winter than the colour.
M. BEDFORD.
[The plumages of the Great Northern Diver are very little
known, but it would seem from the Duchess of Bedford’s
observations that it is not only the young that have light-
coloured bills in autumn. Mr. Ogilvie-Grant has noted
(Vol. I., p. 295) that in the young C. adamsi the up-curved
character of the lower mandible is much less marked, and
“mistakes may easily be made,” but by the end of October
it is possible that birds of the year would have attained this
characteristic. We fancy that the purer white colour of the
bill of C. adamsi would make it distinguishable even at a
distance from C. glacialis.—EDs. |
388 BRITISH BIRDS. .
FULMAR PETREL IN LANCASHIRE.
As Mitchell, in his “ Birds of Lancashire,’ only mentions the
Fulmar Petrel (Fulmarus glacialis) as having occurred four
times in Lancashire, perhaps the occurrence of a fifth example
at Galgate, near Lancaster, on April 3rd, 1904, may be of
interest, especially as it was picked up alive in a field quite
three miles from the sea.
H. W. Rosinson.
wee ae
LitTtLE Rincep PLover In Nort Uist.—Mr. J. E.
Harting reports in the ‘“ Field” (20, x1., 09, p. 329), that he
has received word from Mr. H. E. Beveridge, of Kelso, of a
small Plover which he shot in North Uist, in October, 1908.
By means of a sketch, drawn to the natural size, and a
description of the bird, Mr. Harting comes to the conclusion
that it was undoubtedly a specimen of Agia’itis curonica.
So far as we know an authenticated example of the Little
Ringed Plover has not been obtained in this country for very
many years, and the bird has never before been recorded
for Scotland.
Mypen
3
eftd
Recurvirostra avoc
AN ILUSTRATED: MAGAZINE
DEVOITDTOTHEBIRDS ON |
SS. THE: BRISHUST
MONTHLY ONE. SHILLING: NET
— S2QHIGHTHOLDORN pee lie
WITHER BY &-
DALLMEVER'S
Naturalists’ Camera,
For Telephoto or Ordinary LENSES. ‘
Positive Lens. Works at sili
DALLMRYER’S. :
) Lenses are used
by the most
skilled Bird .
Photographers.
The following are
specially recommended :
THE STIGMATIC SERIES Il. F/6 (Convertible.)
THE SERIES D PATENT PORTRAIT LENSES F 6.
(A Rapid Long Focus Lens at a Moderate Price.)
High or Moderate Power Telephoto Lenses (Original Make).
We are Specialists in Cameras and A Lpparatus Jor Photo- Ornithologists. |
CATALOGUES AND ADVICE FREE. |
J. H. DALLMEYER, Limitep, DENZIL RD.,
Ghowronole: ab NAWMAN- BF, we NEASDEN. LONDON, N.W. |
JUST RECEIVED.
An extremely interesting collection of Birdskins from the high mountains
of Formosa, including many rarities and. recently described species, in
first-class condition.
For List apply to—
W. F. H. ROSENBERG,
Naturalist and Importer of Zoological Collections, 1
57, HAVERSTOCK HILL, LONDON, N.W. ‘
Price Lists of Birdskins, Eggs, Mammals, Reptiles, Batrachians, aicmuetice
Cabinets, Apparatus, etc., post free on Application.
WATKINS & DONCASTER,
Waturalists, | Sh
And Manufacturers of CABINETS and APPARATUS for Entomology, Binds gs Uys
and: Skins, and all Branches of Natural. History. uae
A LARGE STOCK OF INSECTS, and BIRDS’ EGGS and SKINS. | x
. Speciality :~Objects for Nature Study, Drawing Classes, &c.
BIRDS, MAMMALS, &., PRESERVED and MOUNTED by FIRST-CLASS WORKMEN | fit:
TRUE TO NATURE.
All Books and Publications on Natural History supplied. Ne ne :
36, STRAND, LONDON, W.C. (Five Doors from Charing Coss.) i
Catslogue {102 pp.) post
DRUDSHIBIRDS
Pere BY i. EF) WITHERBY, -F.2Z:5,,.) MBO,
Rooke: bY WW: P. PYCRAFT, A.LS;, M.5-0.U.
ConTENTS OF NuMBER 12, Vor. II. May 1, 1909.
Some Early British Ornithologists and their Works, by
W. H. Mullens, m.a., tu.M., M.B.o.u. IX.—William
Macgillivray (1796—1852) and William Yarrell ioe
1853) . Page 389
Notes on the Nesting of ihe Goadandee by N orman Gilroy:
M.B.O.U. ie 400
On the More Important Additions te our t icnoplades of
British Birds since 1899, by H. F. Witherby and N. F.
Ticehurst. Part XX.—(continued from page 375) a 406
Notes :—Life of the late Professor Alfred Newton (A. F. R.
Wollaston). The Birds of Fair Isle (Eds.). Eggs of
the Cuckoo (C. W. Colthrup). Chaffinch Nesting in
Winter (H. E. Forrest). Red Grouse and Black Grouse
Hybrids (Hugh 8. Gladstone). Nesting Records of
the Kittiwake in the Isle of Wight (Rev. J. E. Kelsall).
Briinnich’s Guillemot in the Firth of Forth (Eds.).
Slavonian Grebe and Black-Necked Grebe in Hertford-
shire (Chas. Oldham). Short Notes Se ; 422
Review :—The Hastings and East Sussex Naturalist Fy. 427
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS
AND THEIR WORKS.
BY
W. H. MULLENS, m.a., Lu.m., M.B.0.U.
IX.—WILLIAM MACGILLIVRAY (1796—1852) anp
WILLIAM YARRELL (1784—1853).
AmoneG the many famous names which adorn the long
roll of British ornithologists, that of William Macgillivray
stands forth as facile princeps. His work was not only
far superior to that of his predecessors and contemporaries,
but it remains to this day with but few, if any, serious
rivals, and will:probably continue to do so for many years
to come.
Macgillivray’s great book, “The History of British
A
590 BRITISH BIRDS.
Birds,” which was completed in 1852, has nevertheless
failed to receive the appreciation which it deserves, and
although it is probably far more widely read to-day than
it has been hitherto, it has taken upwards of sixty years
for the student and compiler to recognise its transcendent
merit.
The causes of this neglect are somewhat difficult to
understand ; and probably they arose from a variety of
circumstances. Macgillivray’s personal character was
no doubt an obstacle to his success. One of his warmest
admirers, the great American bibliographer and naturalist,
Elliott Coues, describes him in these words :—
‘““ Macgillivray appears to have been of an irritable,
highly sensitized temperament, fired with enthusiasm
and ambition, yet contending, for some time at least, with
poverty; ill-health and a perhaps not well-founded,
though not therefore the less acutely-felt, sense of neglect ;
thus ceaselessly nerved to accomplish yet as continually
haunted with the dread of failure. . . . . This
author was undoubtedly unwise in his frankness; but
diplomacy is a stranger to such characters.
If he never hesitated to differ sharply with yee or
to express his own views pointedly—if he scarcely dis-
guised his contempt for triflers, blockheads, pedants,
compilers and theorizers . . . . he was nevertheless
a lover of Nature, an original thinker, a hard student,
and finally an ornithologist of large practical experience,
who wrote down what he knew or believed to be true
with great regard for accuracy of statement and in a very
agreeable manner.”
To this must be added the curious coincidence that
in the same year as the first volume of Macgillivray’s
‘“ History of British Birds ’’ was published (that is in
1837), another very famous work on the same subject,
and bearing a precisely similar title, made its appearance.
This was the well-known work of William: Yarrell, which,
from the clearness of its descriptions, the skill of its illus-
trations and the useful conciseness of its information,
i —
“SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 391
speedily became recognised as the standard authority on
British ornithology. The success of Macgillivray’s master-
piece was undoubtedly retarded by the simultaneous
appearance of Yarrell’s work, and it was further hampered
by the fact that while Yarrell completed his task in 1843,
it was not until nine years later that Macgillivray’s was
brought to a conclusion, twelve years having been allowed
to elapse between the publication of the first three and
the last two volumes. The matter of nationality had
also perhaps some bearing on the question; the English
public naturally preferring the work of a fellow country-
man to that of a Scotsman, however able.* But all these
circumstances, much as they tended to prevent the due
appreciation of Macgillivray’s labours, were but trivial
in comparison with the predominating cause of his com-
parative failure. The failure of the “ History of British
Birds ”’ lay in the intrinsic value of the book itself.
To understand how this arose it is necessary to consider
not only the scope of Macgillivray’s book itself, but also
the state and condition of ornithology in this country at
that time. The increasing study of ornithology had
produced in that science, in common with many others,
specialists; 7.e., students and writers who devoted them-
selves to some particular department or branch of their
favourite science. These had gradually formed them-
selves into three distinct groups: the anatomists or
morphologists, the chamber-naturalists, and the field-
naturalists. The first named carried out their work
in the dissecting room and the laboratory, the second
devoted their attention to the study of the skins of birds
in the museum, and of the labours of others in the ornitho-
logical library ; the third gave their time to the observa-
tion and study of living birds in their natural surroundings.
The labours of the chamber-naturalists were chiefly
* In much the same way—to compare small things to great—the
undoubted merit of Fleming’s ‘‘ History of British Animals,’ 1828, had
been injuriously affected by the greater popularity accorded to a
similar undertaking by an Englishman, viz., Jenyns’ ‘“‘ Manual of British
Vertebrate Animals,” which appeared in 1830.
392 BRITISH BIRDS.
directed towards the manufacture of new genera and
the subdivision of existing ones; to proclaiming the
superiority of one system of nomenclature over another ;
to the endless alteration and confusion of the classification
of species, to the disparagement of each other’s labours
and the laudation of their own. On one point and on one
only were they agreed, much and bitterly as they differed
on most other matters: they united in a common hatred
and contempt for the field-naturalists. |
In the opinion of the chamber-naturalists the existence
of this third group of ornithologists was only justified
by the fact that their observations and investigations
provided fresh material for the use and advancement of
the very men who decried their labours. It is true that
most of the really important contributions to the literature
of ornithology had come from the pen of the field-
naturalists, but these works were not deemed “ scientific ”’
and the chamber-naturalist regarded them as but of
small account.
And now suddenly all this was changed, the pedants
and the pundits were threatened with a new and uncon-
sidered danger and driven by it to seek their common
safety in united action. A Scotsman who had spent his
youth in observing and collecting birds, both in the distant
islands of the Hebrides and on the mainland of his native
country, had in due course of time become professor of
Civil and Natural History in a northern university, had
devoted his acute and highly trained intellect to the study,
not of a single branch but of the whole science of ornitho-
logy, and had produced a book which not only recorded
the most careful and accurate investigations in the field,
but also proposed to create a new scientific classification
of birds, founded on the consideration of their digestive
organs, which, from the fact that his skill as an anatomist
was unassailable and that the proposed scheme of classifi-
cation had the further disadvantage of being original,
constituted in the opinion of the chamber-naturalists
a pressing and immediate peril. Presumption combined
LEE:
LZ
EZ
cs
I p Mt i Wi
NOR, mr
17 Wilh i)
WILLIAM MACGILLIVRAY, from the engraving in “A Vertebrate
Fauna of the Outer Hebrides,’ by J. A. Harvie-Brown and
T. E. Buckley, 1888. (By permission of Messrs. Harvie-Brown
and David Douglas.)
WILLIAM YARRELL, after the frontispiece by F. A. Heath, to
the Third Edition of Yarrell’s ‘‘ History of British Fishes,” 1859.
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 395
with merit must be crushed, and crushed it was in a speedy
and most effective manner. The word went forth that
Macgillivray’s work was “choked with anatomical
details.””. The half-truth repelled the public, the ‘‘ History
of British Birds ” was doomed to oblivion and the chamber-
naturalists returned to their discussions in triumph.
That they had incidentally broken the heart of the greatest
ornithologist this country has ever possessed, that they
had nearly prevented the completion of one of the greatest
books on British birds, was to them of course, not a
matter of the least importance.
Fortunate indeed it is that at the present day all this
is changed, and that the “ chamber-naturalist ’ is now
as able in the field as in the museum.
From this combination of adverse circumstances
Macgillivray’s work has never completely recovered,
and probably never will. Although the copyright has
long expired and it now commands a price in the auction
rooms which places it beyond the reach of many who
would gladly possess it, yet the fact remains that in these
days of constant re-issues and new editions of ornithological
books, many of which are more or less worthless, Mac-
gillivray’s great work has never been reprinted and brought
up to date.
No adequate account of the life and work of William
Macgillivray has yet been published; some knowledge
of his character and career can however be derived from
a privately printed book, written by a namesake of the
great ornithologist, and entitled “‘ A Memorial Tribute
to William Macgillivray”’ (Edinburgh, 1901, 1 vol., 4to).
The preface to Macgillivray’s ‘‘ Rapacious Birds of Great
Britain ’” and that to the fourth volume of his “ British
Birds ”’ may also be consulted to advantage.
William Macgillivray was born in Old Aberdeen in 1796.
He left Aberdeen when a child of three, and lived with his
two uncles in the island of Harris—his father, who was
an army surgeon, being absent with his regiment—till
he was eleven years of age, when he returned to Aberdeen to
596 BRITISH BIRDS.
complete his education. At the age of twelve Macgillivray
entered King’s College, and one year later, in 1809, lost
his father, who fell on the stricken field of Corufia.
Macgillivray, as he himself informs us,* ‘Commenced the
study of zoology in 1817 while qualifying for the medical
profession.” . . . . “‘My only guides were Linnezus
and Pennant,” but a fellow student, William Craigie,
evinced an equal interest in Nature, and the two together
undertook a series of “ pleasant and successful excursions
in quest of plants and animals” . . . . “and most
zealously strove to add to our common store of knowledge
both in zoology and botany.” . . . . “ The fascina-
tions of these pursuits were such that, after studying
medicine for nearly five years, during part of which time
I officiated as dissector to the lecturer on anatomy at
Marischal College, I resolved to relinquish it and devote
my attention exclusively to natural history.” In pur-
suance of the project Macgillivray now commenced to
wander over most parts of Scotland; he explored the
“desolate isles of the west” and walked from Aberdeen
to London for the purpose of visiting the British Museum.
He afterwards went to Edinburgh and attended Professor
Jameson’s natural history lectures. He then again
betook himself to the Outer Hebrides, ‘where he hammered
at the gneiss rocks, gathered gulls’ eggs and shot plovers
and pigeons” till finding this dull he returned to the
mainland and became assistant and secretary to Professor —
Jameson, under whose supervision he took charge of the
museum at Edinburgh University. Having held this
post for several years he retired, and renewed his “‘ observa-
tions in the fields,” supporting himself meanwhile by
his labours with the pen. In 1830-1831 he was
unanimously elected as Conservator of the museum of the
Edinburgh College of Surgeons, and this position he held
till 1841, but meanwhile he in no way relaxed his ornitho-
logical labours, save, as he writes, for “‘ about a year when
hope seemed almost to have deserted me.”
* Preface to ‘‘ Rapacious Birds,” p. 2.
SOME EARLY BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 397
In 1833, with a view to re-arranging the catalogue of
his museum, he paid a series of visits to some of the more
notable collections in this country, including the museums
of Glasgow, Liverpool, Dublin, Bristol and London.
In 1834 Macgillivray commenced to give lectures on
natural history, and in 1835 he finished the new catalogue.
In 1841 his connection with the museum came to an end,
he having been appointed to the professorship of ‘ Civil
and Natural History’ in Marischal College, Aberdeen.
During the ten years he was at Edinburgh, Macgillivray
in addition to his other work, published in 1836 * Descrip-
tions of the Rapacious Birds of Great Britain”’ (1 vol.,
8vo), the first volume of the first edition of “A Manual
of British Ornithology ” (2 vols., 8vo, London, 1840-1842 :
the second edition appeared in 1846), and the first three
volumes of his ‘‘ Great Work,” as he rightly termed it,
‘“‘ A History of British Birds, Indigenous and Migratory.”
Besides the above he contributed a “‘ History of British
Quadrupeds ” to Jardine’s ‘“‘ Naturalist’s Library” (40
vols., 1838-1843; 2nd edition, 1844-1855), and compiled the
scientific part of Audubon’s “‘ Ornithological Biographies.”’
There is no need to deal at any length with Macgillivray’s
“Great Work ”’ here, his object in writing it was “to lay
before the public, descriptions of the birds of Great Britain,
more extended and if possible more correct than any
previously offered,” and this he most ably succeeded in
doing, but the illustrations, the anatomical plates
excepted, can hardly be called worthy of the text. Mac-
gillivray occupied his chair at Marischal College for eleven
- years, but in 1850-1851 he was attacked by a serious illness,
the result it is said of a pedestrian excursion undertaken
in the Upper Valley of the Dee, to study that locality for
his last written and posthumously printed book, ‘‘ The
Natural History of Deeside and Braemar ”’ (1 vol., 8vo,
1855). In the autumn of 1851 he removed to the milder
climate of Torquay, and while still at that place he in
March, 1852, published the fourth volume of his “Great
Work.” The fifth appeared in July after his return to
598 BRITISH BIRDS.
Aberdeen, and on September the 8th of that same year
he died at his residence in Crown Street in that city.
In the pathetic “Conclusion” to the fifth volume he
states, “I have finished one of the many difficult and
laborious tasks which I had imposed on myself.”
‘*Commenced in hope and carried on with zeal, though
ended in sorrow and sickness, I can look upon my work
without much regard to the opinions which contemporary
writers may form of it, assured that what is useful in it
will not be forgotten . . . . and knowing that it
will powerfully influence the next generation of our
home-ornithologists.”’
If Macgillivray was not “ the most eminent ornithologist
in Europe,” as he has been designated by his admirers,
and perhaps that description better applies to Naumann,
he certainly was by far the greatest ornithological genius
that this island has produced, and as such we have every
reason to honour his memory.
William Yarrell, Macgillivray’s great contemporary,
was born on the 3rd of June, 1784, in the parish of St.
James’, London. His father carried on the trade of a
newspaper agent in Duke Street, and to this business
Yarrell succeeded in due course. He was educated at
Ealing, and in his eighteenth year entered the banking-
house of Herries, Farquhar & Co., as a clerk, but soon
left to assist his father in business. Yarrell seems to
have turned his attention to the study of ornithology
while engaged on the fishing and shooting expeditions
with which he varied the monotony of business. As
he neared middle age his love for natural history increased,
and he abandoned field sports, and henceforward devoted
himself to the systematic study of zoology. In 1823
he commenced to note the appearance of rare and interest-
ing birds, and is said to have aided Bewick by sending him
rare specimens. He became a fellow of the Linnean
Society in 1825, and was one of the original members of
the Zoological Society. In 1836 he completed a “ History
SOME EARLY “BRITISH ORNITHOLOGISTS. 399
of British Fishes,’ and in July, 1837, published the
first part of his well-known “ History of British Birds.”
This was completed in May, 1843, and the first supplement
was printed in 1845. The “ History of British Birds,”
which originally appeared in three volumes, proved a great
success. Yarrell, besides being an accomplished ornitho-
logist, knew exactly what the general public wanted in
a popular text-book, and, moreover, possessed the skill
of presenting his knowledge in a concise and agreeable
manner. A second edition of the book appeared in 1845,
and a third, incorporating the second supplement, in
1856. In 1871 a fourth edition was commenced; this was
finished in 1885, and consisted of four volumes, the
original text being almost entirely rewritten, Professor
Newton undertaking that of the first two volumes and
Mr. Howard Saunders that of the remainder; the latter of
these two—both, alas, recently deceased—further con-
densed the whole into a single volume, illustrated with the
same figures as the larger work, and entitled “An
Illustrated Manual of British Birds” (1st edition, 1889 ;
Ind, 1899).
Yarrell was a man of unbounded energy, and in addition
to his business labours was the author of many and various
writings on natural history.* He was also a zealous
supporter of several learned societies. After a long and
busy life he was seized with a sudden illness while on a
visit to Yarmouth, where he died on September Ist, 1853.
He was buried at Bayford in Hertfordshire in a spot
which had been selected by himself, and a medallion tablet
at the west end of the south aisle in St. James’ Church
records his memory in his native parish.
* For a list of these, 81 in number, cf. ‘‘Memoir,” third edition,
‘¢ British Fishes.”’
( 400 )
NOTES ON THE NESTING OF THE GOOSANDER.
BY
NORMAN GILROY, m.B.0.v.
For the last eight years or so it has been my custom to
spend a portion of the spring in a remote part of
Sutherlandshire, and although each May I have observed
a duck Goosander (Mergus merganser) with a brood of
newly-hatched young ones on the large loch near which
I stayed, it was not until the spring of 1908 that I actually
came across the nesting site, or rather, sites, for the
main object of these notes is to show that with the
Goosander there is a slight inclination to sociability.
My previous experience of the Goosander as a nesting
species had been slight—confined, in fact, to the finding,
or rather, to the assisted discovery of a nest on April
21st, 1905, in a deep cavity on the steep, rocky, and
sparsely-wooded bank of a river in Ross-shire (the sides
of the ravine were in places almost inaccessible), and to
the discovery, after a long and interesting watch, on
April 25th of the same year, of a second nest on a wooded
hillside in Sutherlandshire.
In the first-mentioned case I saw little of the sitting
bird, for she at once scuttled out of the cavity containing
the nest, and flew rapidly down the gorge to the main »
river. There were thirteen eggs anda profusion of down,
and incubation had commenced, although at the time the
ground was white with snow. I saw no sign of the drake
anywhere, and I am credibly informed that as soon as
the clutch is complete the male Goosanders leave the
neighbourhood and repair probably to the sea. My
subsequent observations tended to confirm this.
My experience with the second pair was considerably
more interesting. I was sitting in a sheltered spot on the
wooded hillside above mentioned (which overlooks a loch
of considerable size) watching a couple of Eagles hunting,
when my attention was arrested by the movements of a
NORMAN GILROY: THE GOOSANDER. 401
pair of ducks, which suddenly rose from the loch and
flew rapidly towards me. I was at first unable to determine
accurately the species. But fortunately the sun was
shining brightly ; still more fortunately the birds came
quite close to me before they turned, so that the charac-
teristic plumage of the male was easily discernible. After
turning once they flew round at varying heights in wide
ellipses, the duck leading, whilst both birds uttered a
curiously muffled, but harsh, quacking noise. I noticed
that the duck invariably dived down over a particular
spot on the hillside, and it at once struck me that the nest
was not far from this point, so that when they finally
flew down to the loch again I started to explore the hill-
side carefully in the immediate neighbourhood of the spot.
mentioned. The ground was sparingly strewn with
boulders of considerable size, most of them half buried
in the soil, but at the base of the second one, which I
examined, was a wide dry cavity containing a lot of
withered grass which had evidently not been blown there
by the wind. I could not possibly reach it or get at it
from the front in any way, but found that by the removal
of some small stones from behind the whole cavity could
be comfortably examined, and in it was the Goosander’s
nest, containing one fresh egg. The nest itself was com-
posed of masses of white, withered grass, and at this time
I saw only one or two down tufts. I visited the nest
twice afterwards, but had no opportunity of seeing the
duck sitting, as I had to come south before the clutch
was completed. An egg appeared to be laid every
other day, and I afterwards heard from a gillie, to whom
I showed the nest, that this bird ultimately laid eight.
I had no further experience of the Goosander until
1908; for, although each spring up till then I carefully.
searched a heavily wooded hillside hanging right over a
Sutherland loch, I could never discover a nest, in spite of
the fact that after perhaps a fortnight’s hunting I in-
variably saw the duck Goosander with her young on the
water.
4.02 BRITISH BIRDS.
That year I arrived in Sutherlandshire on May 12th.
The weather was beautifully fine and warm, but this was
only of recent occurrence, as apparently the heavy snows
of late April had but just melted away. On the evening
of my arrival I had a short conversation with the keeper,
in the course of which I asked him if he had seen anything
of the Goosander. He at once replied that a few mornings
previously as he was coming down the road which runs
parallel with a small stream that flows from the hills
through a deep gorge down into the loch, he had seen a
Goosander flying rapidly up-stream, and that at a certain
point it had appeared to dive into the bank. There
was of course no doubt in my mind then that I was
at last on the right track and that the explanation of
my previous years’ fruitless search was at hand.
The keeper had described the spot where he had seen
the Goosander disappear so fully that I did not think it
necessary to take him with me next morning, and I ac-
cordingly started away at an early hour to explore the
gorge, the banks of which are in places very steep and
rocky—in others less precipitous, but thickly grown
with heather, with here and there a mountain ash, or
birch, or an aspen, now just bursting into leaf. Although
I was perfectly familiar with the stream, having often
tramped it from mouth to source in search of the
Ring-Ousel, curiously enough it had never struck me before
as an ideal place for the nest haunt of the Goosander, and
I naturally was full of excitement at the prospect before
me. On reaching the spot which I imagined the keeper
to have described—a high and somewhat bare hummock,
forming almost an island in the stream, with a solitary
tree and thin growth of heather on the top, the whole
overlooking a beautiful waterfall, I at once commenced
searching the holes and rifts in the peat, some of which
are fringed with heather. In about ten minutes I came
across a deepish cavity with a well-worn track leading
in to it, and two tell-tale down-tufts clinging to the
heather at the entrance. I could by no means reach the
NORMAN GILROY: THE GOOSANDER. 403
nest, and as I was anxious to catch the sitting duck if
possible I broke away a piece of the bank. As soon as I
did so, however, the duck escaped by another hole which
I had not previously noticed, and flew down towards the
loch. Her plumage was very bright, and she appeared
to be in perfect condition. The nest was perhaps four
feet from the entrance—the cavity being dry and warm—
and it contained ten eggs and a profusion of down mixed
with good-sized bunches of heather, and a very few birch
leaves, evidently taken there by the bird. The site had
A Nesting Haunt of the Goosander.
been used before as was amply demonstrated by the
presence of old eggshells. The eggs were in an advanced
state of incubation, and should have hatched out in a
week or less. Both entrances to the nest were quite open
and unprotected, and both were apparently used
regularly.
I told the keeper on my return that I had found the
Goosander’s nest and the matter dropped. But on the
21st I happened to be rambling along the same stream
early in the morning looking at a Kestrel’s eyrie, when
4.04 BRITISH BIRDS.
to my astonishment, on suddenly turning a corner, I
saw a Goosander flying rapidly towards me. I concealed
myself hurriedly, and the duck passed me at a distance of
a few feet. She was quacking in the same harsh but
curiously muffled way as I have before mentioned, but
unfortunately she disappeared before I could gain a spot
commanding a view of the entire gorge. This place was
only about three hundred yards from the nest described
above; but I could not think that the duck belonging
to that one would be here alone after her eggs had been
taken, so I determined to come out at four o’clock on the
following morning and take up a suitable position to
watch for her. A wait of five hours, however, was
unavailing ; I saw no sign of the Goosander at all. My
search of the banks, a very difficult matter at this point,
seeing that they were heavily fringed with heather, and
that the rocks were very sheer, proved equally fruitless.
I got back almost exhausted, but arranged to go out with
the keeper early next morning to clear up the mystery.
The morning broke bright and clear, and we started
off at 4.30. On reaching the point at which I had taken
the Goosander’s nest a few days previously, the keeper
passed it unconcernedly, so I at once knew there was a
second nest close by. We crossed the stream almost
exactly where I had seen my bird disappear, and the
keeper then remarked, “‘ This is the spot.” We climbed
up the bank with considerable difficulty, but after a short
search came upon a large and very deep hole almost
concealed by a heavy fringe of heather. There were
half-a-dozen pieces of down scattered about, and im-
mediately I raised the heather fringe I heard the
Goosander hissing inside. The nest itself was about
seven feet in, and I caught the sitting duck, which was in
perfect plumage and condition, although the ten eggs
were within a few days of hatching, and the quantity of
down was considerable. The nesting hole was damp
and filthy, and had evidently been used for years, so that
I was surprised to find the duck so beautifully clean, the
NORMAN GILROY: THE GOOSANDER. 405
rose tints being particularly fine. She was very fat, but
did not struggle much, and when I released her, flew off
down the stream quacking quietly.
I was, of course, greatly astonished to find two
Goosanders nesting in such close proximity ; and the
fact that they must have been for years inhabiting a
stream with which I was perfectly familiar goes far to
prove how easily the species may be overlooked.
I saw no sign of the drakes during the whole of this,
or any previous, visit to the district.
nN
{
Gg j , \ :
A gquataro!
( 406 )
ON THE MORE IMPORTANT ADDITIONS TO OUR
KNOWLEDGE OF BRITISH BIRDS SINCE 1899.
BY
H. F. WITHERBY anv N. F. TICEHURST.
Part XX.
(Continued from page 375.)
Corrigenda et Addenda.
In concluding this series of articles we would express our
great indebtedness to the Rev. F. C. R. Jourdain, who has
given us generous and continual assistance; to Mr. R. J.
Ussher, who has taken the greatest pains to make our record
of Irish birds complete, and has added much new information;
to Mr. H. E. Forrest, who has given us much help in Welsh
and Shropshire records; to Mr. T. H. Nelson, who has most
kindly assisted us in Yorkshire records; and to Messrs. W.
Evans and J. A. Harvie-Brown, who have given us much
advice in Scottish records.
In making use of this series of articles on the additions to
the second edition of Howard Saunders’ ‘‘ Manual,” the
reader is warned that it is necessary to consult also the indices
of the two volumes of the Magazine now complete, since
many observations have been recorded while these articles
have been in progress.*
Wuite’s THrus# (Vol. I., p. 53).—Saunders describes it as
‘“‘ probably ”’ breeding in Japan, and also describes Swinhoe’s
egos. These are now known to have belonged to some other
species. Many authenticated nests and eggs have now been
taken in Japan (cf. Heatley Noble, Bull. B.O.C., X., p. 47,
Collingwood Ingram, Ibis, 1908, pp. 132 and 386, Plate IV.,
figs. 2 and 3 (eggs)).
Repstart (Vol. I., p. 54).—Scotland.—Quoting from the
“Manual” we stated that this bird had not previously been
recorded from the ‘‘ Hebrides.’’ Mr. D. Macdonald, of Tober-
mory, kindly writes that this should read Outer Hebrides, as
the Redstart is common in Mull. Moreover, Mr. Harvie-
Brown has noted (Ann. S.N.H., 1902, p. 140) that it was met
with once by Finlayson, of Mingulay, on August 6th, 1889,
* Some corrections of Irish records not mentioned in this article are
made on pp. 248 and 276 of this volume.
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 407
and another was recorded at Barra Head on May 15th, 1894.
Saunders says: ‘“‘In Scotland it has of late years spread
northwards ; now breeding freely in the Moray basin, and
only less so in Sutherland, Caithness and West Ross.” But,
as far back as 1839 Jardine (Brit. Birds, Vol. II., p. 119)
wrote, ‘‘ It extends, . . . , to the northern parts of Scotland.”
In the sixties, Booth noted their abundance in the Highlands :
in the Catalogue of the Cases in his Museum, at Brighton
(p. 121), he says: ‘I have noticed them particularly abundant
in the wooded glens in the Highlands, where the old stone
dykes and rugged, weather-beaten trees afford ample choice
for the selection of a nursery.”’ Was also noted in Moidart
prior to 1865 (Mrs. Blackburn, Birds drawn from Nature), and
in Ross-shire prior to 1872 (Bateson, Proc. Glasgow N. H.
Soc., II., p. 182) (W. Evans, in litt.).
Buack RepstarrT (Vol. I., p. 54).—Jreland.—One was seen
near Courtown Harbour, co. Wexford, in February, 1909
(M. D. Haviland, Field, 27, 1., 09). February is an unusual
month for its occurrence in Ireland, October and November
being the usual months.
NIGHTINGALE (Vol. I., p. 55).—We omitted some information
with regard to its range in Yorkshire, but this is not now in-
cluded as it has been decided to open an inquiry into the
exact range of the Nightingale in England. This inquiry
will be organised by the Rev. F. C. R. Jourdain and N. F.
Ticehurst, and will commence in the next volume. Meanwhile
those who are able to make observations at any point on the
outskirts of the normal range of the Nightingale, would
greatly assist the inquiry by keeping full and careful notes
of occurrences, and especially of instances of nesting which
come under their notice.
Wuireturoat (Vol. I., p. 55).—Scotland.—One was shot
in June, 1897, and a pair nested at Eoligary, Barra, in 1900.
They had been seen at Barra in May for several years (J. A.
Harvie-Brown, Ann. S.N.H., 1902, p. 140).
LEssER WHITETHROAT (Vol. I., p. 55).—Scotland.—One was
shot on October 24th, 1898, on Barra (W. E. Clarke, Ann.
S.N.H., 1899, p. 109). An adult male was killed at the
Suleskerry Lighthouse on September 17th, 1902 (id., t.c.,
1903, p. 24). Both this and the Common Whitethroat were
observed by Dr. Hamilton at Traigh, Loch Morar, in autumn
of 1880 (cf. Zool., 1880, p. 503) (W. Evans, in litt.).
Ireland.—The second example was taken on October 10th,
1899, at the Innishtrahull Lighthouse (most northerly Irish
light) (R. M. Barrington, Mig. B. Irish Lt. Stations, p. 72).
408 BRITISH BIRDS.
GARDEN-WARBLER (Vol. I., p. 56).—Scotland.—One was
shot at Barra on October 24th, 1898 (W. E. Clarke, Ann.
S.N.H., 1899, p. 110). It is, in my experience, more plentiful
and more generally distributed than the Blackcap in the Forth
District, and also in Perthshire (W. Evans, 7n litt.).
Woop-WreEN (Vol. I., p. 83).—Scotland.—Saunders says :
“In Scotland it is fairly distributed, and has apparently
spread northward of late years, being recorded by Messrs.
Harvie-Brown and Buckley as breeding in the north-east of
Sutherlandshire, and as having been identified at Dunbeath,
in Caithness, and in West Ross.” According to Booth (Cata-
logue, p. 107), it was abundant in the north of Scotland in
the sixties. ‘‘I have,” he says, ‘‘ noticed this bird as being
particularly numerous in the wildest glens of Perthshire, Ross-
shire, and Caithness.”’ Was also noted in Moidart prior to
1865 as seemingly a regular summer visitor, but ‘“‘ less common
with us than the Willow-Warbler”’ (Mrs. Blackburn, t.c.).
‘Tt is of general diffusion through the kingdom” (Selby, Brit.
Ornithology, Vol. I., Ist ed., 1825, p. 189) (W. Evans, in litt.).
GREENISH WILLOW-WARBLER (Vol. I., p. 82).—The speci-
men taken at the Suleskerry Lighthouse in 1902 now proves to
be an example of Eversmann’s Warbler (Phylloscopus borealis).
Mr. Eagle Clarke obtained a similar bird on Fair Isle in 1908,
and found that, although it only had a single wing-bar, it was
a specimen of P. borealis. The fact that this species sometimes
exhibited this character had escaped the attention of Mr.
Howard Saunders and himself when they identified the Sule-
skerry bird. It is possible that the only other British record
for P. viridanus may also prove an error, and that the species
may have to come off the British list (W. Eagle Clarke, Ann.
iS: V7... 1909) p. 114).
Hypouais ? sp. (Vol. I., p. 83).—Mr. F. C. Selous writes :
‘““My friend Major Mangles when at school in Croydon took
a nest with four eggs in an osier-bed in 1884. Two of these
eggs were broken and the other two I have in my collection.
They are undoubtedly eggs of either the Melodious or the
Icterine Warbler. Howard Saunders and Mr. E. Bidwell
both thought they belonged to the former species.”
ReED-WARBLER (Vol. I., p. 84).—The first authentic example
for Ireland was killed by striking the Rockabill Lighthouse on
October 20th, 1908. Mr. A. H. Evans stated that he heard this
species singing in a reed-bed on the Shannon, near Portumna,
on July 23rd, 1904 (R. M. Barrington, Scient. Proc. Rk. Dublin
So¢.;,.e1t.5p; 19);
GREAT REED-WARBLER (Vol. I., p. 84).—One was shot in a
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 4.09
reed-bed at one of the meres at Ellesmere, in Shropshire,
about 1886. It had been noticed singing, and was supposed
to be a Nightingale. It was stuffed by C. W. Lloyd, and
purchased by H. Shaw; subsequently it passed through the
hands of G. Cooke and G. F. Fox, and is now in Mr. W. S.
Brocklehurst’s collection. It was examined by Mr. Forrest
soon after Cooke bought it (H. E. Forrest, in litt., and Fauna
of Shropshire, p. 111).
GRASSHOPPER- WARBLER (S. page 89).—Scotland.—Breeding
in Morayshire (near Elgin) in 1896—7-8, and not included
in Messrs. Harvie-Brown and Buckley’s “‘ Fauna of Moray ”’
(R. H. Mackessach, Ann. S.N.H., 1900, p. 48).
ALPINE ACCENTOR (Vol. I., p. 109).—One was shot ‘“‘a few
years since” (1904) at Ettington, near Stratford-on-Avon, on
the borders of Warwick and Worcester (R. F. Tomes, Vict.
Tost. Warwick, 1.,.p: 191).
BEARDED Titmouse (Vol. I., p. 109).—One was seen by
Captain Henneker, who knew the bird well, in a reed-bed
near Sudbury, Derbyshire, in the summer of 1896 (F. C. R.
Jourdain, Vict. Hist. Derby, Vol. I., p. 126).
CrESTED Titmouse (Vol. I., p. 110).—The bird observed
by Baron von Higel was at Torquay, as already pointed out
by Mr. W.S. M. D’ Urban (Vict. Hist. Devon, p. 301).
Tree- Prerr (Vol. I., p. 112).—Scotland.—Booth (Catalogue,
p. 17) says: ‘‘ Forest of Glenmore, in Inverness-shire, where
in the summer of 1869 I found it breeding in considerable
numbers ”’ (W. Evans, 7n Jitt.).
Warter-Pirrt (Vol. I., p. 113).—Mr. O. V. Aplin writes that
the square brackets enclosing his Oxfordshire record should
be removed. Our only reason for inserting them was because
Mr. Aplin considers there is no distinction between A. s.
spipoletta and A. s. rupestris, but we consider that the two forms
are quite distinct, and did not know to which his record
referred.
A third example from Merioneth was obtained by Mr.
Caton Haigh on February 21st, 1898 (H. E. Forrest, Vert.
Fauna N. Wales, p. 123).
GOLDEN ORIOLE (S. page 145).—Jreland.—A female was
found dead at the Skelligs Lighthouse, co. Kerry, on May 23rd,
1899 (R. M. Barrington, Mig. B. Irish Lt. Stations, p. 11).
RED-BACKED SHRIKE (Vol. I., p. 148).—Jreland.—An im-
mature bird (the second Irish specimen) was received by Mr.
R. M. Barrington from the Wicklow Head Lighthouse, where
410 BRITISH BIRDS.
it had been caught at the lantern on the night of September
Ist, 1908 (R. M. Barrington, in litt.). Scotland.—Saunders
says: ‘‘In the south-east of Scotland it has occasionally been
known to breed, as well as at Cambuslang, Lanarkshire, in 1893
[1892 in Ann. S.N.H., 1893, p. 182]; but beyond the Forth
it is rare,’ etc. The first part of the above statement is too
strong, no nesting having ever been proved; only birds seen in
‘“‘ the breeding season,’ which may have been passing migrants,
while the Cambuslang record is apparently of doubtful value ;
Mr. J. Paterson, who sent it to the ‘“‘ Annals,” refers to it in
his list of Clyde birds (Brit. Assocn. Handbook Fauna, etc., Clyde
Area, 1901, p. 161) thus: ‘‘ Red-backed Shrike; recorded by
the writer as having nested in Lanark (Ann. S.N.H., 1893,
p. 183), but I fear deception somewhere ” (W. Evans, in litt.).
Waxwine (Vol. I., p. 148).—Scotland.—In connection with
the occurrence of the example in Unst in November, 1903, it
is of interest to note that many were obtained in the south-
east of Scotland (and elsewhere) about the same time (W.
Evans, Ann. S.N.H., 1904, p. 54, etc.).
Prep FiycatTcHer (Vol. I., p. 148).—Jreland.—The eighth
Trish specimen was obtained at the Fastnet, co. Cork, on
October 9th, 1899 (R. M. Barrington, Mig. B. Irish Lt. Stations,
p. 11), and the ninth at the Tuskar Rock on September 11th,
1901 (2d., in latt.). Scotland.—To the counties in which it has
nested should be added Midlothian (W. Evans, in litt.).
RED-BREASTED FrycarcHer (Vol. I., p. 149).—Ireland.—
The data of the two last Irish specimens (cf. swpra, p. 248)
are: Leg and wing sent from the Blackwater Bank Lightship,
co. Wexford, on September 24th, 1898 (R. M. Barrington,
t.c., p. 10); a female, or immature bird, was obtained on the
Bull Rock, co. Cork, on November 18th, 1903, and is now
in Mr. Barrington’s collection (R. M. Barrington, in Witt.).
Hawrincu (Vol. I., p. 152).—North Wales——One was shot
in a garden at Trescawen in June, 1906--the first record for
the county (H. E. Forrest, in ltt.). Ireland.—The following
have been taken at Irish lights: Hook Tower, co. Wexford, one,
October 25th, 1897, and one, November 4th, 1897; Tuskar,
co. Wexford, one, November Ist, 1897; Mine Head, co.
Waterford, one, November 10th, 1898 (R. M. Barrington,
t.c., p. 127). Scotland.—‘ So many occurrences of both old
and young birds in the south-east of Scotland have of late
come to my knowledge, that I now regard the species as
widely distributed, and not rare in the district’? (W. Evans,
im litt.).
ADDITIONS SINCE = 1899. 41]
Siskin (Vol. I., p. 180).—The record of its breeding in
Derbyshire should be enclosed by square brackets.
TREE-SpARROW (Vol. I., p. 181).— Scotland.—To the
counties in which it is now known to nest, add Linlithgowshire.
(W. Evans, on litt.).
[NoRTHERN Buuirincny (Vol. I., p. 246).—One was shot on
Caister Denes, Norfolk, on January 22nd, 1893 (cf. Zool.,
1894, p. 85). Mr. J. H. Fleming, of Toronto, has kindly sent
for our inspection two skins (collectors unknown, but the labels
seem quite genuine), a male taken at Bolton on June 18th, 1894,
and a female at Gloucester on May Ist, 1889.]
CrossBILL (Vol. I., p. 247)—‘“I have recently got satis-
factory evidence that several pairs nested on the borders of
Shropshire and Herefordshire in the spring of 1895. Crossbills
were remarkably numerous here at that time ”’ (H. E. Forrest,
in litt.). Ireland.—In 1907 Mr. C. Langham reported that
he had Crossbills in several places at Tempo Manor, co.
Fermanagh. They had been scarce for a year or two (R. J.
Ussher, in litt.). A nest was found with fresh eggs on April
17th, 1907, in co. Wicklow (R. Hamilton-Hunter, Jrish Nat.,
1907, p. 208).
Snow-Buntine (Vol. I., p. 250).—Jreland.—An adult
male was sent to Mr. Barrington from Aranmore, co. Donegal,
on July 28th, 1898 (Birds of Ireland, p. 78).
NutcraAcKER (Vol. I., p. 254).—One was seen near Scotton
Common, Lincolnshire, on August 14th, 1900 (F. M. Burton,
Nat., 1900, p. 319).
KineFrisHerR (S. page 279)—One on River Broom, West
Ross, September, 1898 (Ann. S.NV.H., 1899, p. 47).
Wryneck (Vol. I., p. 280).—Jreland.—One was found dead
on the Fastnet, co. Cork, on September 17th, 1898 (R. M.
Barrington, Mig. B. Irish Lt. Stations, p. 181).
GREAT SpoTTED WooDPECKER (Vol. I., p. 281).—Scotland.
—The Wells and Minto woods are in Roxburghshire. Jreland.
—Two bones found by Mr. Ussher in separate caves in co.
Clare and identified by Mr. E. T. Newton as belonging to this
species, point to its being formerly a resident in Ireland
(cf. List of I. Birds, p. 24).
Rouuer (Vol. I., p. 281).—Jreland.—Ten have been obtained
—the last in co. Donegal on October 10th, 1891 (R. J. Ussher,
Inst of I. Birds, p. 24).
Brsz-Eater (Vol. I., p. 282).—The Yorkshire record should
412 BRITISH BIRDS.
have been ascribed to Mr. G. W. Murdoch (cf. Birds of Yorks.,
p. 284, and Yorks. Weekly Post, 23, 1x., 05).
Hoorort (Vol. I., p. 282).—One shot near Brackley,
Northampton, in May, 1908 (O. V. Aplin, Zool., 1908, p. 312).
Litre Owt (Vol. I., pp. 315 and 335).—Several were seen
in the summer of 1908, and five were liberated in Essex
(A. W.,” Feeld, 15, vut., 08). One was shot early in 1909
at Burton-on-Trent (F.C. R. Jourdain, in litt.). Of the one
recorded from Scotland (p. 315) Mr. G. Sim stated that he
had since heard of facts which led him to suspect that the
bird was an escape (Vert. Fauna Dee, addenda).
Snowy Owt (Vol. I., p. 315).—Jreland.—One was seen by
Captain Kirkwood in December, 1906, at Bartragh, co. Mayo
(R. Warren, Zool., 1907, p. 73). An immature female was
obtained in co. Mayo about the beginning of December, 1906,
and an immature male (?) was shot near Ardagh, co. Kerry,
and was received on March 6th, 1907 (R. J. Ussher (fide W.
J. Williams), Zrish Nat.,“ 1909, p. 100).
MarsH-HarrierR (Vol. I., p. 316).—The following have
been shot at Hickling, Norfolk :—Adult ¢ May 9th, 1905;
adult ¢ May 17th, 1906; and adult ? June 25th, 1906
(F. Smalley, in litt.).
Montacu’s Harrier (Vol. I., p. 317).—The following have
been shot in Norfolk :—Adult female, Hickling, May 11th,
1906; adult female, June Ist, and adult male, June 17th,
1907, near Lynn (F. Smalley, in litt.).
All these records point to the fact that the birds would
have bred in these districts had they not been shot. No words
are too strong to condemn this wanton destruction, and it
may be pointed out (since it is not generally realised) that, as
long as keepers know that they can dispose of such birds, the
more inclined will they be to destroy them.
ROUGH-LEGGED Buzzarp (Vol. I., p. 319).—Jreland.—Only
twelve (eleven obtained, one seen) are recorded in the “ Birds
of Ireland,” and of these the one shot on October 4th, 1899,
is mentioned in the Appendix. The second example referred
to (p. 319) was received by Mr. Williams on November 5th,
1902, and not “in the early part of 1903,” as recorded in the
“Trish Naturalist.” Of the two seen in December, 1906,
the second—a female—frequented the moors during the
winter, and was eventually poisoned and received by Mr.
Williams on February 26th, 1907 (R. J. Ussher, in litt., and
Irish Nat., 1909, p. 100). There are thus seventeen records
from Ireland, sixteen obtained, and one seen.
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 413
Buack Kite (Vol. I., p. 319).—The date given for the
Aberdeen specimen in Sim’s ‘Vert. Fauna of Dee” is
April 18th, 1901; and he says it was shot within the city
boundary (W. Evans, in litt.).
GREENLAND Fatcon (Vol. IL, p. 320).—North Wales.—
Mr. A. Heneage Cox writes that there is a specimen at Voelas
Hall, Denbighshire, which was trapped by the keeper there.
This is the second record for North Wales (H. E. Forrest,
on liit.).—Ireland.Several mistakes occur in this summary,
and several more birds have been obtained and not recorded.
Mr. Ussher provides us with the following list, which it
seems better to print in full, and it must be taken to cancel
that on p. 320 :—
juv., Horn Head, Donegal, shot end December, 1903 (Zool., 1904,
ps its),
? juv., Horn Head, Donegal, trapped March 21st, 1905 (I. Nat.,
| 1905, ps 119).
& ) one, Owey Island, Donegal, seen March 14th, 1905 (J. Nat., 1905,
n | p. 201).
5 6 Glenties, Donegal, shot October 25th, 1905 (J. Nat., 1905,
p. 263).
| ¢ Carrickfergus, Antrim, shot February 12th, 1906 (I. Nat., 1906,
Pp. 7h0).
? nearly adult, Crossmolina, Mayo, trapped April 9th, 1905
(f. Nats;, W905: 202).
one, Clare Island, Mayo, seen March 10th, 1905 (I. Nat., 1905,
p: 201):
? juv., Belmullet, Mayo, shot March 29th, 1905 (I. Nat., 1905,
p- 201).
adult (?) Belmullet, Mayo, shot March 31st, 1905 (I. Nat., 1905,
gi po.’ 207).
= | adult (?) Belmullet, Mayo, shot April 2nd, 1905 (I. Nat., 1905,
py p- 201). -
S < one Belmullet, Mayo, captured and escaped, March 28th, 1905
A (I. Nat., 1905, p. 202).
© | two, Belmullet, Mayo, seen March and April, 1905 (G. Wallace,
on ltt.).
$ juv., Castlegore, Mayo, shot March 30th, 1906 (in coll. of C. J.
Carroll).
? juv., Ballysodare, Sligo, shot December 29th-30th, 1906 (fide
Williams and Sons),
$ juv., Westport, Mayo, shot April 10th-12th, 1907 (fide Williams
and Sons).
? juv., Mizen Head, Cork, shot March, 1905 (I. Nat., 1905,
p. 202).
=<
g Skelligs, Kerry, shot March, 1905 (I. Naé, 1905, p. 202).
g very white, Skelligs, Kerry, shot March, 1905 (J. Naét., 1905,
p. 202).
g juv., Skelligs, Kerry, shot March, 1905 (I. Nat., 1905,
p. 202).
MuUNSTER.
414, BRITISH BIRDS.
This list comprises details of fifteen birds preserved, a six-
teenth caught and escaped, and four or more others seen
between 1903 and 1907. The Greenland Falcon seems to
visit Ireland more frequently in March and April than any
other months.
IcELAND Fatcon (Vol. I., p. 321).—Jreland._The examples
recorded were seen and both obtained in the early part of
1905 (see R. J. Ussher, List of I. Birds, p. 29).
Hospsy (Vol. I., p. 321).—Found breeding in June, 1894,
near Goyts Bridge, on the Derbyshire side of the River Goyt
(Coward and Oldham, B. of Cheshire, p. 255). Ireland.—The
tenth example from Ireland was picked up under a telephone
wire at Loftus Hall, Fethard, co. Wexford, on April 16th,
1899 (R. M. Barrington, Mig. B. Irish Lt. Stations, p. 3). The
eleventh included in Mr. Ussher’s ‘‘ List of Irish Birds”’ rests
upon insufficient evidence (R. J. Ussher, 7n litt.).
Osprey (S. p. 359).—We did not mention the visits of this
species to Great Britain owing to their regularity, but the
following records from Ireland may be noted :—One, co. Sligo,
May 3rd, 1901; ¢ juv., co. Kerry, September 30th, 1903;
¢ ad., co. Louth, end of April, 1907; ¢ juv.andone juv., co.
Sligo, October 15th and 29th, 1907 (R. J. Ussher, an litt.).
The two last have already been referred to (cf. Vol. I., p. 327),
but the month was wrongly given as November.
Nicut-Hsron (Vol. I., p. 348).—Jreland.—An adult female
was obtained at Ardee, co. Louth, on May 10th, 1900 (R. J.
Ussher, fide Williams and Sons, in litt.) Animmature bird taken
on the Dodder, co. Dublin, on March 31st, 1904, is in the
National Museum, Dublin (7d.). At the Belfast Nat. Field
Club meeting on October 25th, 1907, Mr. S. M. Stears
exhibited a specimen of this bird (J7ish Nat., 1908, p. 65).
Twenty-four records since 1834 (R. J. Ussher, List of J.
Birds, p. 31).
LirrLe Birrern (Vol. I., p. 349).—An adult male shot at
Claverley, near Bridgnorth, in September, 1897, is the fifth
record for Shropshire (H. E. Forrest, in litt.). Ireland.—
About thirty have been obtained (R.*J. Ussher, List of J.
Birds, p. 31).
AMERICAN BritrerN (Vol. I., p. 349).—Jreland.—The four
obtained since the publication of the “ Birds of Ireland ”
(cf. antea, Vol. II., p. 276) are as follows :—Tralee, co. Kerry,
November 2nd, 1901; Carlow, January, 1902; Moorstown,
co. Tipperary, November 30th, 1904; near Colligan, co.
Waterford, December 24th, 1904 (R. J. Ussher, in litt.).
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 415
Gtossy Isis (Vol. I., p. 350).—Jreland.—The ‘‘ Manual ”
gives twenty from Ireland, the “ Birds of Ireland” twenty-
two, “* List of Irish Birds ” (1908), thirty-six. Of the fourteen
extra to the “ Birds of Ireland ”’ three were obtained in each
of the counties of Cork, Waterford, and Wexford, two in Clare,
and one each in Dublin, Down, and Galway. Seven of these
occurred in September, five in October, and one in November
(R. J. Ussher, in litt.).
SPOONBILL (Vol. I., p. 350).—Jreland.—One was obtained in
co. Galway on December 16th, 1890 (R. J. Ussher, fide Williams
and Sons, in litt.). One was obtained at Tralee, co. Kerry,
in September or October, 1904 (id., fide Rohu and Sons).
Grey Lac-Gooss (Vol. II., p. 24).—With reference to the
young bird obtained in the Tay area in 1906 Mr. Harvie-Brown
writes :—‘‘ Semi-domesticated Grey Lags have bred for some
years close to and even within the watershed of Tay, near the
southern boundaries, and truly wild Grey Lags have never
been recorded as nesting anywhere within forty miles of the
north-west boundary of the Tay area.”
[Ruppy SHELD-Duck (Vol. II., p. 51).—A pair was shot on
the Essex coast early in January, 1908 (J. C. F. Fryer, Field, 1,
me. 08); |
GADWALL (Vol. II., p. 52).—Jreland.—One, of a pair, shot
on the Barrow, near Stradbally, Queens co., February 7th,
1908 (John W. Young, Field, 15, 11.,08). One was shot in
November, 1907, near Wexford Harbour (W. Rocke, Field,
22, 11., 08). Notso rare in Ireland (Sligo, Roscommon and
Leitrim) as might be supposed from records given. It is a
regular visitor in small numbers to Lough Arrow: three or
four couples were on the lough during the first half of April,
1909. This information comes to me from Messrs. J.
Henderson, senr. and junr., both of whom are well acquainted
with the bird (F. C: R. Jourdain, in litt.).
SHOVELER (Vol. II., p. 52).—A few pairs are said to breed
on the moors of Somersetshire (F. L. Blathwayt, Vict. Hist.
‘Somerset, Vol. I., p. 155). A brood was hatched both in 1904
and 1905 ona pool at Patshull, Staffs. (Lord Dartmouth, Field,
15, vitt., 08). Lreland.—Increasing as a breeding species in
all the provinces (R. J. Ussher, 2n litt.).
Pinrart (Vol. IIL., p. 54).—Hawick is in Roxburgh, not
Berwick. But the lochs at which both nests are said to have
been found are in Selkirk (W. Evans, in Iitt.).
GARGANEY (Vol. II., p. 54).—A pair was seen on Ellesmere,
Shropshire, in April, 1906 (H. E. Forrest, in litt.). Ireland.—
416 BRITISH BIRDS.
One was shot near the Curragh of Kildare on September 21st,
1899 (R. J. Ussher, List of I. Birds, p. 34). Scotland.— Seven
killed at Pitfour, Aberdeenshire, October 22nd, 1898 (Ann
S.N.H., 1899, p. 50).
WicrEon and Pocuarp (Vol. II., pp. 55, 56.—Scotland.—
‘The Wigeon and Pochard have both been found nesting in
Ross-shire [Gairloch (?) ], and the eggs obtained’ (Bateson,
1872, Proc. N. H. Soc., Glasgow, II., p. 182). In the last line
of page 55 (swpra) for ‘‘ 1902” read “ 1899.”
RED-CRESTED PocuarD (Vol. II., p. 56).—The second
record mentioned under Yorkshire refers to the same bird
as the first, and is wrongly dated (see Nat., 1900, p. 322).
Frerrucinous Duck (Vol. II., p. 57).—Ireland.—“ Mr. F.
Dyer, of Ramsgate, preserved one of two shot at Cruiserath,
co. Meath, in December, 1889, as I am informed by Mr. J.
K. Harting, in litt.”” (R. J. Ussher, in litt.).
TurrED Duck (Vol. II., p. 83).—WScotland.—Along with
Mr. Harvie-Brown’s two papers in the “ Ann. S.N.H.” and
‘“‘ Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society ”’ should be read
Mr. W. Evans’ paper in ‘Ann. S.N.H.,” 1896, pp. 148
to 155.
Scaup-Duck (Vol. II., p. 85).—Jreland.—“I have seen
several on a lake near the coast in Mayo in June, 1907”
(R. J. Ussher, 2n litt.). Scotland.—For correction of Stark’s
nesting record see Vol. II., p. 132.
GOLDEN-EYE (S. page 451).—Flocks, partly composed of
males in adult plumage, seen on two lochs in the Forth area in
summer of 1908 (W. Evans, Ann. S.N.H., 1909, p. 49).
LONG-TAILED Duck (S. page 455).—Jreland.—Occurs in
winter on the north and west coasts down to Kerry (Zool.,
1907, p. 159). Several have been met with on Lough Corrib,
and one of them (a male in breeding plumage) was shot in
April, 1900, and is in the Nat. Museum in Dublin. A flock
of five was seen on Lough Beg, and specimens were obtained
(Brit. Assoc. Guide to Belfast, 1902). Three mature birds in
Belfast Lough in May, 1898 (ibid.) (R. J. Ussher, in litt.).
Eiper Duck (Vol. II., p. 86).—Line 3, for ‘‘ Hansa”’ read
“« Handa.”
GoosaANDER (Vol. II., p. 87).—IJreland.—“‘ On January
16th, 1909, W. J. Williams wrote ‘ Adult male Goosander
from Wicklow. I have not handled one for at least seven
years’ ”’ (R. J. Ussher, in liit.).
Stock-Dove (Vol. II., p. 125).—Scotland.—An old record
for the south-west of Scotland (Ecclefechan, 1858) is given in
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 417
the ‘‘ Zoologist ’’ for 1859 (p. 6378), as pointed out in my note
in “ Ann. §.N.H.,” 1896, p. 254 (W. Evans, in liit.).
TurtLe-Dove (Vol. IL., p. 126).—Yorkshire.—Nests
annually, and is by no means rare in the Scarborough district.
Also found at Wetherby, and nests regularly near Harrogate
and Driffield (W. Gyngell, Nat., 1908, p. 464).
Buack Grouse (Vol. II., p. 127).—Two hybrids, apparently
between Black and Red Grouse, were shot by Mr. A. Foster,
of Bettws-y-coed, one on December 9th, 1895, and the other
on November 20th, 1897, on Yspytty Moor, Carnarvon (H.
E. Forrest, Vert. Faun. N. Wales, p. 307). Ireland.—Note the
correction, Vol. IT., p. 167.
PrarRMIGAN (Vol. ITI., p. 128).—Note the correction Vol. II.,
Da, 167.
SporreD Crake (Vol. IL., p. 129).—Jreland.—In addition
to those mentioned Mr. R. J. Ussher provides us with par-
ticulars of the following examples :—One, Castlerea, co.
Roscommon, October 20th, 1900; two, King’s co., October
7th, 1904; one, co. Fermanagh, October 13th, 1904; one,
Balbriggan, co. Dublin, November 26th, 1906 ; one, Drogheda,
co. Louth, December 4th, 1906 (fide Williams and Sons) ; one,
co. Dublin, October 6th, 1902 (fide R. M. Barrington) ; one,
Buttevant, co. Cork, January 4th, 1904 (Rohu and Son, J. Nat.,
1904, p. 98).
[Crane (Vol. II., p. 147).—Two were shot on December Ist,
1903, at Knowle, Warwickshire, and were exhibited at a
meeting of the Birmingham Nat. Hist. and Phil. Society
(A. H. Duncalfe, on litt.). These seem likely to have been
escaped birds. |
TURNSTONE (S. p. 557).—Has now been definitely recorded
for Derbyshire (F. C. R. Jourdain, Zool., 1909, p. 111) and
also Staffordshire (J. R. B. Masefield, R. and Tr. N. Staffs.
F. Club, 1909). Jreland.—Found regularly throughout the
year along the Dublin coast. A female with ripe ova was.
obtained on July 18th, 1900, but was without a mate (C.J.
Patten, Nat., 1909, p. 51).
Avocet (Vol. II., p. 228).—The east Sussex coast should
have been included after Kent, as it forms a continuous
coastline, but the records seem to be few. Mr. H. G.
Alexander reminds us that one was seen on several days in
March, 1906, by his brother and himself (cf. Zool., 1906, p.
152).
Grey PHaLarope (Vol. II., p. 229).—Five are recorded
from the Isle of Man (P. G. Ralfe, Birds I. of M., p. 213).
418 BRITISH BIRDS.
One was shot at Carno, Montgomeryshire, on October 25th,
1907 (H. E. Forrest, in litt.) One was shot near Hilbre
Island in November, 1898 (Coward and Oldham, B. of
Cheshire, p. 256). Ireland.—One was shot on Lough Foyle,
near Eglinton, co. Londonderry, on September 18th, 1899
(D. C. Campbell, J. Nat., 1900, p. 81). Mr. Ussher informs
us of two others—one near Fethard, co. Tipperary, on
November 30th, 1906 (fide C. J. Carroll), and one at Moy-
vally, co. Meath, on October 21st, 1902 (fide Williams and
Sons).
RED-NECKED PHALAROPE (Vol. II., p. 229).—An adult in
winter plumage (the first authentic record for Shropshire)
was shot near Shrewsbury on November Ist, 1904 (H. E.
Forrest, in litt.).
GREAT SNIPE (Vol. II., p. 229).—Jreland.—The thirteenth for
Ireland was a male obtained in co. Antrim in October, 1901,
and is inthe National Museum, Dublin (R. J. Ussher, in litt.).
Scotland.—One shot near Elgin, October 15th, 1898 (Ann.
S_N.H., 1899, p. 51).
LirtLe Srint (8. p. 585).—The third recorded specimen for
Derbyshire was shot out of a trip of a dozen on the sewage
farm at Egginton, September 26th, 1908, and is now in the
possession of Mr. T. E. Auden (F. C. R. Jourdain, in litt.).
CURLEW-SANDPIPER (Vol. II., p. 268).—Recorded for the
first time for Derbyshire (Zool., 1906, p. 141). reland.—Flocks
of considerable size (as many as 200 to 300) have been seen
exceptionally in autumn on the Dublin coast (C. J. Patten,
Aquatic Birds, p. 302).
PURPLE SANDPIPER (S. p. 593).—Jreland.—Frequently seen
on the Dublin coast in nuptial plumage as late as the middle of
May (C. J. Patten, Aquatic Birds, p. 306). A pair found by
Witherby on a small island off the coast of Galway on May
30th, 1895, although in nuptial plumage had the sexual organs
still undeveloped.
Kwort (Vol. IL., p. 268).—Jreland.—One in summer plumage
taken in July, 1904, at Belmullet, co. Mayo, is in the National
Museum, Dublin (R. J. Ussher, in litt.).
SANDERLING (S. p. 597).—Ireland.—Has been observed on
the Dublin coast in every month of the year. Even in July
flocks of fifty have been seen, but the condition of their genital
organs has not been examined (C. J. Patten, Nat., pp. 83-85).
A large flock was observed by Mr. Ussher on the shore at Cross, —
co. Mayo, on June 3rd, 1907, and one was shot there in the
beginning of August, 1907 (in litt.).
‘ADDITIONS SINCE 1899. 419
Rurr (Vol. II., p. 269).—Jreland.—Mr. Ussher sends us a
list of eighteen occurrences, briefly as follows :—1901, May,
a male in breeding dress, co. Down ; one, August, co. Wexford ;
one, September, co. Wicklow ; 1902, one, August, co. Mayo ;
one, September, co. Donegal; 1904, one, September, co.
Westmeath ; one, October, co. Wexford ; 1905, two, August,
and three September, co. Kildare; two, September, King’s
co.; one, October, co. Cavan; 1908, two, September, co.
Clare ; one from co. Limerick, date unknown.
Woop-SANDPIPER (Vol. II., p. 269).—Only three appear
to be recorded for North Wales, the last being shot by Mr.
Caton Haigh on May 3rd, 1898, in Carnarvonshire (H. E.
Forrest, Vert. F. N. Wales, p. 358).
SportEeD REDSHANK (Vol. II., p. 270).—Jreland.—An im-
mature female was obtained on Great Island, Cork Harbour,
on December 26th, 1898 (W. B. Barrington, in litt., to R. J.
Ussher).
Bar-TAILED Gopwit (S. p. 623).—Ireland.—Flock of
several hundred on Dublin coast on June 7th, 1899 (C. J.
Patten, Aquatic Birds).
BLACK-TAILED Gopwit (Vol. II., p. 270).—Scotland.—In
“Forth” (Ann. S.N.H., 1903, p. 22, and 1904, p. 57), and
Tiree (Ibis, 1903; p. 50).
Biack TERN (Vol. II., p. 305).—An immature bird was
shot near Broseley, Shropshire, on September 18th, 1901.
In 1904 a pair visited Ellesmere from June 8th—llth, and two
immature birds were seen on September Ist, 1904 (H. E.
Forrest, in litt.). Under Derby, for “ Etwell,’” read “‘ Etwall.”
Ireland.—Mr. Ussher gives us information of the following
from Messrs. Williams and Sons’ books :—One, co. Limerick,
September 30th, 1901 (in National Museum); one (immature),
Athlone, September 28th, 1903; one (immature), co. Cavan,
October 7th, 1903.
WHITE-WINGED BiAck TERN (Vol. II., p. 306).—Ireland.—
Six are recorded in the “ Birds of Ireland” (p. 213) against
five in the “‘ Manual.”
SanpwicH TERN (Vol. II., p. 306).—A male (the first re-
corded for Shropshire) was found dead near Shrewsbury in
August, 1897 (H. E. Forrest, in litt.).
Lirtte TrErRN (Vol. II., p. 308).—WScotland.—A few pairs
have again nested in the Forth area for a year or two past.
This is of some importance in view of Saunders’ statement
that this Tern had ceased to nest in Haddingtonshire, which
was quite correct (W. Evans, in litt.).
420 BRITISH BIRDS.
Sooty Tern (Vol. If., p. 308)—The specimen figured in
the ‘‘ Manual ”’ was not shot as there stated (p. 653) but killed
with a stone (F. C. R. Jourdain, in litt.).
LittLe Guu (Vol. I1., p. 328).—/reland.—An adult in winter
plumage was killed about March 7th, 1909, near Laytown,
co. Meath (R. M. Barrington, [rish Nat., 1909, p. 99).
GREAT AND LeEssER BLACK-BACKED GULLS (S. pages 675
and 677).—Scotland.—Mr. Evans brings forward much evi-
dence to prove that the naturalists who visited the Bass Rock
during the first half of last century were unanimous in
regarding the Black-backs that then bred there as Larus
marinus, and that since about 1860, L. fuscus alone has been
ascertained to nest there. The early ornithologists, however,
left behind no conclusive evidence that their identification
was correct (W. Evans, Proc. R. Phys. Soc. Edin., Vol. XVI.,
pp. 42-51).
Guaucous Guu (Vol. II., p. 328).—Ireland.—In addition
to those mentioned, the following occurrences supplied by
Mr. Ussher do not appear to have been recorded :—1900,
November 16th, co. Kerry; 1901; March 19th, co. Mayo;
April 2nd, co. Kerry; 1904, January 25th, co. Donegal ;
February 9th, co. Wicklow ; March 3rd, co. Donegal; March
15th, co. Donegal ; December 2nd, co. Mayo ; 1905, December
15th, co. Mayo; 1906, December 27th, locality uncertain
(fide Williams and Sons) ; 1907, March 31st, co. Donegal (fide
W. A. Hamilton); January llth, co. Mayo (in National
Museum). This last may be the same bird as that recorded
from Bartragh on December 8th, 1906 (cf. supra, p. 329), since
the date here given is the date of the Museum register.
IcELAND-GULL (Vol. II., p. 329).—Jreland.—Mr. Ussher gives
us particulars of eleven obtained (many others have been
seen), and amongst them we may note one from co. Galway
on April 21st, 1906, and one from co. Londonderry on April
20th, 1903 (J. Nat., 1903, p. 198), in addition to the late
occurrences already mentioned.
KITTIWAKE GULL (S. page 683).—Scotland.—There are now
considerably over 100 pairs breeding on the St. Abb’s Cliffs.
First noticed there about a dozen years ago (W. Evans, in
litt.).
GreAT SKvua (Vol. II., p. 330).—Holyhead record should
have been under North Wales, not Ireland. An adult
obtained on the River Shannon at Portumna, in October,
1906, is in Mr. C. J. Carroll’s collection (R. J. Ussher, in litt.).
ADDITIONS SINCE 1899.» 421
PoMATORHINE SkKvaA (Vol. II., p. 330).—Jreland.—In addi-
tion to those mentioned, Mr. Ussher informs us of the following
unrecorded examples :—Ballynakill, co. Galway, Septemk rc
16th, 1902 ; co. Tipperary, September 19th, 1902 (fide Williams
and Sons); off Cork Harbour, November 9th, 1903; off
co. Galway, May 9th, 1904; off south-west coast, May, 1904.
LonG-TAILED Skva (Vol. IL., p. 331).—Jreland._September
22nd, 1899 (? locality) ; co. Mayo, August 22nd, 1903 (R. J.
Ussher, in litt., fide Williams and Sons). The following were
seen by Mr. G. P. Farran: one fifty miles west of Tearaght,
August 7th, 1906; one forty-five miles west of Skelligs,
August 8th, 1906; one sixty-two miles south-west by west
of Bull Rock, September 11th, 1907 (td., in hit.).
BLACK-THROATED Diver (Vol. II., p. 333).—Ireland.—
An adult and an immature bird are recorded in Williams
and Sons’ books for July 28th, 1906 (R. J. Ussher, an litt.).
GREAT-CRESTED GREBE (Vol. II., p. 333).—Scotland.—It
may be recalled that Selby in 1838 (British Ornithology,
Vol. II., p. 394) stated that it bred annually on a few of the
northern Scottish lakes (W. Evans, in litt.).
SLAVONIAN GREBE (Vol. II., p. 334).—Jreland.—One in
summer plumage was obtained at Belmullet, co. Mayo, in
April, 1907 (R. J. Ussher, in lit.).
BLACK-NECKED GREBE (Vol. II., p. 369).—Jreland.—Three
have been obtained since the publication of the “ Birds of
Ireland” ; one has been mentioned, the other two Mr. Ussher
informs us are: Mullingar, December 30th, 1901 (fide Williams
and Sons) ; King’s co., July 4th, 1907 (H. E. Joly, in litt.).
Manx SHEARWATER (Vol. II., p. 372).—Scotland.—Present
in the Firth of Forth every year from May to October; at
first, only a few, but in hundreds during August and Sep-
tember. Odd birds have occasionally been seen at other times
(February, etc.), (W. Evans, in litt.).
Futmar (Vol. II., p. 373).—One was shot by Mr. Wise on
February 23rd, 1908, off Kingsgate, Thanet, Kent (C. Ingram,
Zool., 1908, p. 272). One was picked up dead at Canty Bay,
near North Berwick, on July 16th, 1908. A pair is said by
the lighthouse-keepers on the Bass Rock to have nested there
in 1906 (W. and T. Malloch, ¢.c., 1908, p. 396), but we can
give no credence to this last statement. Mr. W. Evans
writes :—‘‘ The principal lighthouse-keeper on the Bass tells me
he never heard it suggested that the Fulmar had bred on the
Rock. He has no doubt the recorded nesting of the Storm-
Petrel there in June, 1904, is what is meant.”’
Cc
LIFE OF THE LATE PROFESSOR ALFRED NEWTON.
I HAVE been invited to write a Life of the late Professor
Alfred Newton. If any of your readers who have letters or
reminiscences, or any other interesting information about
Professor Newton, will be kind enough to communicate with
me at the Savile Club, 107, Piccadilly, W., I shall be
exceedingly grateful. I will, of course, undertake to return
all letters, etc., to the senders.
A. F. R. Wo.LuLaston.
THE BIRDS OF FAIR ISLE.
In the last issue of ‘‘ The Annals of Scottish Natural History ”
(1909, pp. 69-75) Mr. W. Eagle Clarke gives a report on the
observations made on this now well-known island during
1908. The results are even more extraordinary than in
previous years (cf. Vol. I., pp. 233 and 381), and this may be
due to the fact that by the generosity of friends Mr. Clarke
has been enabled to instal a regular observer in the person of
xeorge Stout, a youthful inhabitant of the island, who had
already shown himself an apt pupil. Beyond this important
arrangement Mr. Clarke himself spent six weeks on the island
in the autumn. Mr. Clarke’s report is this year confined to
those species which are additions to the fauna of the island,
and he tells us that a great mass of information is reserved for
publication in a further contribution. In those occurrences
which are referred to, however, there is a most unfortunate
lack of detail, which greatly lessens their interest. The list
of Fair Island birds is now brought up to the remarkable total
of 185. We learn that Mr. Eagle Clarke has had the good
fortune to secure the interest of the proprietor of the island
in the investigations, and we understand that Mr. Clarke has
now been granted the sole right to shoot on the island. The
following is a brief summary of the most notable items :—
BaRRED WARBLER (Sylvia nisoria).—Several occurred in
autumn and were identified beyond doubt.
SUBALPINE WARBLER (Sylvia subalpina).—This is one of
the most interesting of these remarkable records, but only
the bare fact that a bird of this species occurred during the year
is chronicled. It will be remembered that the only other
known occurrence of this species was at St. Kilda on June
13th and 14th, 1894 (cf. Saunders’ Manual, p. 53). Now
NOTES. 425
that Dr. Hartert has distinguished between the various races
of this species (Vog. pal. Fauna, pp. 596-7), it would be
interesting to discover the region of the origin of this specimen
(we presume the bird-was secured) by a careful comparison.
IcTERINE WARBLER (Hypolais icterina).—The occurrence
of this species can only be inferred by its inclusion in the list
and by the remark that it has not been previously recorded
from Scotland !
Savr’s WarRBLER (Locustella luscinioides).—The occurrence
of this species in the spring is truly, as Mr. Clarke says, one
of the most interesting events in British ornithology for
many years. Since it became extinct as a breeding species in
1856 it has never been identified with certainty in England,
and it has never before been known to visit Scotland.
ALPINE ACCENTOR (Accentor collaris)—One was seen at
close quarters by Mr. Clarke in the autumn resting on the face
of one of the great cliffs on the west side of the island. This
Species is new to Scotland.
BuLuE-HEADED WaaraiL (Motacilla flava).—This species
occurred, but no details are given.
ReED-THROATED Preir (Anthus cervinus).—This species
occurred on two occasions during Mr. Clarke’s visit in the
autumn. Mr. Nicoll has shown (antea, p. 278) that there are
very few reliable records of this bird’s occurrence in the British
Isles.
Ricuarp’s Prerr (Anthus richardi).—Several appeared in the
autumn. Only once before recorded for Scotland.
GOLDEN ORIOLE (Oriolus galbula).—Observed both in spring
and autumn.
Hawrincu (Coccothraustes vulgaris)—A male in spring.
There being no trees or shrubs it lived on the ground and fed
on the dung of ponies.
Two-BARRED CrossBILL (Loxia bifasciata).—One in spring ;
lived much the same as the Hawfinch. Only once previously
recorded for Scotland.
Rustic Buntine (Hmberiza rustica).—Single birds on both
passages. Mr. Clarke remarks that it has only once before
been known to visit Scotland, but we may remind him that
besides the bird recorded by himself from Cape Wrath on
May 11th, 1906, a pair was reported as obtained at Torphins,
Aberdeenshire, in March, 1905 (cf. Vol. I., p. 249).
RosE-COLOURED STARLING (Pastor roseus).—An adult male
in spring. A similar bird was reported on good evidence in
1907.
Turrep Duck (Fuligula cristata).—One or two appeared on
migration, but whether in spring or autumn is not stated.
424, BRITISH BIRDS.
Temmincre’s Stintr (Lringa temmincki).—Occurred in
autumn ; very rare visitor to Scotland.
Woop-SanpDpPrreR (Z'otanus glareola).—This bird also
occurred, but no details are given. It seems curiously rare in
Orkney and Shetland.
BLACK-TAILED Gopwit (Limosa belgica).—One visited the
island in mid-winter.
EGGS OF THE CUCKOO.
Ir may be of interest to put on record the following
particulars of Cuckoos’ eggs which I had the good fortune to
find last year :—
Date. Place. Foster Parent. Cuckoo’s Egg.
May 18th. Sussex. Robin, 3 eggs. (No. 1.) Colour like Robin’s
egg.
May 30th. Surrey. Tree-Pipit, (No. 2.) Dark grey-brown.
4 eggs, red
spotted form.
June Ist. Same Tree-Pipit, (No. 3.) Pale pink - brown,
place. 3 eggs, grey similar to a Robin’s egg.
blotched form. Found six inches from the
cup of the nest, on the
‘* platform.”
June 7th. Same Tree-Pipit, (No. “ Pale pink-brown, like
place. 1 egg, red No. 3.
spotted form.
(No. 5.) Another egg outside
the nest on the *‘ platform.”
This one larger than No. 4,
and grey-brown like No. 2.
This egg had a small hole in
it, and the two in the nest
were stuck together by the
contents of another egg,
which had probably been
eaten. No more eggs laid,
and the nest deserted.
June 15th. Hamp- Meadow-Pipit, (No. 6.) Green-yellow.
shire. 4 eggs.
June 24th. Surrey. Hedge-Sparrow, (No. 7.) Like a Pied-Wagtail’s
3 eggs. egg.
July 3rd. Same Hedge-Sparrow, (No. 8.) As No. 7.
place. 2 eggs.
C. W. CoLTHRUP.
CHAFFINCH NESTING IN WINTER.
WirH reference to the nest described in British Brrps
(antea, p. 381), I regret to say that on further investigation
I found that the statement that the birds were seen feeding
the young was incorrect. The position of the nest did not
permit a view of its contents, and the nest itself contains no
evidence of its having contained young. It can be proved
NOTES. 425
that the Chaffinches built the nest in December, and were
constantly about it during January and February, and that
the hen brooded upon it. Beyond that nothing is certainly
known, and it is extremely doubtful if a brood could have
been reared successfully for lack of suitable food.
H. E. Forrest.
RED GROUSE AND BLACK GROUSE HYBRIDS.
In the third line of Mr. Ogilvie-Grant’s note on this subject
(swpra, p. 386) the name “Glen Troot” should be “Glen
Trool.”” Two specimens of a similar hybrid obtained on the
borders of Dumfriesshire and Kirkcudbrightshire, recorded in
the “‘ Field” at the time, may be seen in the Tullie House
Museum, Carlisle. Another specimen, obtained near Kirk-
connel (Dumfriesshire), is in the possession of the gentleman
who shot it, and is now in Glasgow. These examples will
be duly referred to in my book on the “ Birds of Dumtries-
shire,” which it is hoped will shortly be published.
Huau 8S. GLADSTONE.
NESTING RECORDS OF THE KITTIWAKE IN THE
ISLE OF WIGHT.
Mr. P. W. Muwn and I, in our “ Birds of Hampshire,” recorded
a Kittiwake’s egg, as picked up under the Culver Cliffs, Isle
of Wight, in 1903. Mr. R. H. Fox, of Shanklin, now writes
to me that Mr. G. T. Woods, the finder of the egg, after con-
sultation with Mr. H. F. Poole, considers it to be a dwarfed
egg of the Herring-Gull.
This puts back the nesting of the Kittiwake in the Isle of
Wight for many years, and it would be interesting to know the
date of any authentic specimens in local collections.
J. E. KELSALL.
BRUNNICH’S GUILLEMOT IN THE FIRTH OF FORTH.
A FEMALE specimen of Brimnich’s Guillemot (Uria bruennicht)
was picked up dead on the shore at Craigielaw Point, on the
Haddingtonshire coast of the Firth of Forth, on December
11th, 1908, and was sent to the Royal Scottish Museum by
Mr. Valentine Knight. Judging by the size of the bill, which
measures along the curve of the culmen only 1-2 inches, Mr.
Clarke considers the specimen a bird of the year (W. Eagle
Clarke, Ann. S.N.H., 1909, pp. 75 and 76). Mr. Clarke is,
however, mistaken in stating that since 1895 ‘no other
specimen has been detected either in British waters or on
our shores,” for two have since been procured off the
Yorkshire coast, and another, if correctly identified, has been
seen off the Farne Islands (cf. swpra, p. 331).
4.26 BRITISH BIRDS.
SLAVONIAN GREBE AND BLACK-NECKED GREBE
IN HERTFORDSHIRE.
On the 14th, and again on the 2lst of March, I watched a
Slavonian Grebe (Podicipes auritus) on Wilstone Reservoir, near
Tring. The bird was in winter plumage, but the approaching
change into breeding dress was heralded by a rufous tinge on
the feathers of the flanks. On April 18th there was a Black-
necked Grebe (Podicipes nigricollis) in full summer plumage
on the same water. The slender, slightly recurved bill of this
bird was in striking contrast with the thick, straight bill of
the Slavonian Grebe.
CHas. OLDHAM.
Earty ARRIVAL OF THE Swirt IN IRELAND.—Mr. Nevin
H. Foster writes to us from Hillsborough, co. Down, Ireland,
that he saw a Swift (Cypselus apus) on April 20th—a very
early date for the appearance of the bird in that locality.
ROLLER IN CUMBERLAND.—An adult Coracias garrulus is
recorded as having been shot by a keeper at Knorren, near
Brampton, on June 17th, 1907 (L. E. Hope, Zool., 1909, p. 156).
LONG-EARED OwL IN SHETLAND.—Three Asio otus were seen
at Hayfield, near Lerwick, in February, 1909 (J. S. Tulloch,
Ann. S.N.H., 1909, p. 115).
Litre Ow. in NorrinGHAMSHIRE.—An example of Athene
noctua is recorded at Widmerpool on December 10th, 1907,
and another near Clifton Grove on March 14th, 1908 (J. W.
Carr, Zool., 1909, p. 113).
GADWALLS IN FIFESHIRE AND ORKNEY.—A pair of Anas
strepera was seen and one obtained on January 25th, 1909,
on Morton Loch, near Tayport, and on the 29th a flock of
thirty, of which three were shot and proved to be of this
species, appeared on the same loch (W. Berry, Ann. S.N.H.,
1909, p. 116; cf. also supra, p. 348). An adult drake was
shot out of a pack of Wigeon on March 8th, 1904, on Loch
Stenness. Two days afterwards a female was seen on the
same loch, and an adult male was seen on December 14th,
1906 (H. W. Robinson, loc. cit.).
Stock-DovE NESTING IN LANARKSHIRE.—In connection
with the spread of the Stock-Dove (Columba nas) as a breeding
Species in Scotland it is interesting to note that it “‘is now
becoming quite established as a breeding species’? in the
Blantyre district of the Clyde Valley (W. Stewart, Ann. S.N.H.,
1909, p. 115).
i
nm ay
=) |
EE Lo. yd
So
yy
The Hastings and East Sussex Naturalist (Vol. I., No. 4,
February 25th, 1909).
THIs number of the Journal of the Hastings and St. Leonards.
Natural History Society contains plenty to interest the
ornithologist. The Society is much to be congratulated upon
its vigour, and especially upon its strength in energetic and
capable ornithological members—we believe it can boast of
more M.B.O.U.’s among its members than any other local
natural history society. The most important paper (pp.
153-173, plates XVIII.-X XIV.) in this number is one by our
own contributor, Mr. W. H. Mullens, on ‘“ Gilbert White and
Sussex.”” In this paper, which originally took the form of
a lecture delivered before the 12th Congress of the South-
Kastern Union of Scientific Societies, Mr. Mullens traces, with
great care and thoroughness, Gilbert White’s intimate connec-
tion with Sussex, and especially with the villages of Harting,
near Petersfield, and Ringmer, near Lewes. He used to.
journey into Sussex frequently, and he greatly loved the
Downs, of which he wrote: “I still investigate that chain of
majestic mountains with fresh admiration every time I traverse:
it.” There hesaw Great Bustards and Kites, while along the
chalky cliffs of the Sussex shore ‘“‘ the Cornish Chough builds,
I know,” he writes to Barrington. A careful paper is that by
Mr. M. J. Nicoll on the Pipits which occur in the Hastings
district. Here is recorded the fact, which we do not remember
to have seen in print before, that a pair of Tawny Pipits
‘‘ undoubtedly bred in Sussex in 1905, and: again, possibly, the
following year,” while in 1906 Mr. Nicoll saw an adult bird
collecting nesting materials (p. 183). Amongst the ‘‘ Annual
Notes,” by the Rev. E. N. Bloomfield, we may note the
following interesting records, which we do not think have
been previously referred to :—Red-footed Falcon, Ashford,
June 10th, 1908; Night-Heron, Lydd, October 3rd, 1906 ;.
Spoonbill, two, Romney Marsh, April Ist, 1908 (p. 187).
(
429)
INDEX.
abietina, Phylloscopus collybita. See
Chiffchaff, East European.
Accentor, Alpine (additions), 409 ;
at Fair Isle, 423.
—— Hedge. See Sparrow, Hedge.
accipitrinus, Asio. See Owl, Short-
eared.
acuta, Dafila.
adamsi, Colymbus.
White-billed.
Additions to our Knowledge of
British Birds since 1899, 24, 51,
83, 125, 146, 228, 267, 305, 327,
368, 406.
alba, Ciconia.
albellus, Mergus.
albicilla, Haliaztus.
White-tailed.
albifrons, Anser.
fronted.
ALEXANDER, H. G., Notes on
Pallas’s Sand-Grouse in Kent,
134; Autumn and Winter
Singing of Buntings, 237.
ee na oe, On an lan Of
Mapping Migratory Birds in
their Nesting Areas, 322.
alle, Mergulus. See Auk, Little.
allent, Porphyriola. See Gallinule,
Allen’s.
alpina, Tringa.
americana, Mareca.”
American.
Amputation of Lapwing’s Toes by
means of Wool, 281.
anglicus, Dendrocopus major. See
Woodpecker, Great Spotted.
anglorum, Puffinus. See Shear-
water, Manx.
—— Regulus regulus.
Golden-crested.
apiaster, Merops. See Bee-Eater.
apivorus, Pernis. See Buzzard,
Honey.
apus, Cypselus.
aquaticus, Acrocephalus.
bler, Aquatic.
See Pintail.
See Diver,
See Stork.
See Smew.
See Eagle,
See Goose, White-
See Dunlin.
See Wigeon,
See Wren,
See Swift.
See War-
| aquaticus, Cinclus.
| arenaria, Calidris.
| bailloni,
See Dipper.
See Puffin.
See Diver,
arctica, Fratercula.
arcticus, Colymbus.
Black-throated.
See Sanderling.
argentatus, Larus. See Gull, Her-
ring.
ARNOLD, E. C., Notes on Barred
Warbler in Norfolk, 200; Pec-
toral Sandpiper in Norfolk,
206; Aquatic Warbler in
Sussex, 236.
arquata, Numenius. See Curlew.
arvensis, Alauda. See Lark, Sky.
—— Anser. See Goose, Bean.
assimilis, Puffinus. See Shearwater,
Little Dusky.
ater, Parus. See Titmouse, Coal.
atricapilla, Muscicapa. See Fly-
catcher, Pied.
atrigularis, .Turdus.
Black-throated.
Auk, Great (additions), 331.
Little (additions), 332.
auritus, Podicipes. See
Slavonian.
Avocet (additions), 228, 417. ;
avocetta, Recurvirostra. See Avocet.
See Thrush,
Grebe,
_ Baur, P. H., On the Nesting of the
Seaup-Duck in Scotland, 209.
Porzana. See Crake,
Baillon’s.
Banks, R. C., Note on Grey Phala-
rope in co. Wexford, 240.
BARRINGTON, R. M., Pallas’s Grass-
hopper-Warbler in __ Ireland,
230; Note on Little Bunting
in Ireland, 238.
BAxTER, EVELYN V., and LEONORA
J. Rrytout, Note on Albinistic
Variety of the Redwing, 277.
| Bee-Eater (additions), 411.
GRACE THE
Notes on the
BEDFORD, HER
DUCHESS OF,
430
Solitary Sandpiper and other
Waders in Kent, 156%
Goosander in Bedfordshire,
384; the Bill of the Great
Northern Diver, 387.
belgica, Limosa. See Godwit, Black-
tailed.
BERESFORD-WEBB, G. M., Note
on an Escaped Nutcracker,
28.
biarmicus, Panurus. See Titmouse,
Bearded.
Bibliography of British Birds
Notieed, 340.
bifasciata, Loxia. See Crossbill,
Two-barred.
Brrp, Rev. M:. C.. H.,. Notes on
Green-backed Gallinule in Nor-
folk, 134; The Average
Weight of Snipe, 312.
Bird-Hunting in Wild Europe, Re-
viewed, 284.
BRITISH
BIRDS.
brachyrhyncus, Anser.
Pink-footed.
Brambling (nestling), 193; in West
Sutherland, 347.
brenta, Bernicla. See Goose, Brent.
British Ornithologists’ Union, the
Jubilee of the, 274; and Rare
Breeding Birds, 274.
bruennicht, Uria. See Guillemot.
Briinnich’s.
Bullfinech, British, 130;
193, 196.
—— Northern (additions), 411.
bulwert, Bulweria. See Petrel,
Bulwer’s.
Bunting, Lapland, in Ireland, 248.
—— lLarge-billed Reed, in Kent,
88.
See Goose,
(nestling),
ric Stee Little, in Ireland and Norfolk,
Birds, How to Attract and Protect |
Wild, Reviewed, 172.
Bittern, in Hampshire,
Yorkshire,, 100 ;
OG =) SER:
in Hadding-
tonshire, 140; in MHertford-
shire, 309; in Pembrokeshire,
ati:
—— American, in Ireland, 276;
(additions), 414.
—— Little (additions), 414.
Blackbird (nestling), 189.
BLADEN, W. WEtLs, Note on
Nesting of the Shoveler in
Staffordshire, 95.
BLATHWAYT, Rev. F. L., Note on
Inland Nesting of the Sheld-
Duck and Nesting of Pochard,
Shoveler and Teal in Lincoln-
shire, 95.
Bluethroat in Norfolk, 200; on the
Isle of May, 346.
BonuoTe, J. L., Note on the East
European Chiffchaff in the
Isle of Wight, 233.
borealis, Motacilla. See Wagtail,
Grey-headed.
—— Parus. See Titmouse,
thern Marsh.
—— Phylloscopus.
Eversmann’s.
BoRRER, CLIFFORD, Note on the
Northern Willow-Wren in Nor-
folk, 342.
boscas, Anas.
Nor-
See Warbler,
See Mallard.
238; at Sule-Skerry, 314.
—— Rustic, at Fair Isle, 423.
—— Snow (nestling), 193;
tions), 411.
—— Yellow (nestling), 196.
(addi-
Buntings, Autumn and Winter
Singing of, 204, 237.
| Bunyarp, Percy F., Nesting
Habits of the Marsh-Warbler,
183; On the Eggs of the Tree-
Pipit, 335.
Bustard, Great (additions), 147.
Little (additions), 148.
BUTTERFIELD, W. Ruskin, Note on
Sooty Shearwaters in Sussex
and Kent, 243.
Buzzard, Honey, in North Wales,
36; in Shropshire, 204; in
Ireland, 276, 277; in England,
283, 314.
—— Rough - legged
4 ©
hee
(additions),
cachinnans, Larus. See
Yellow-legged Herring.
calidris, Totanus. See Redshank.
Gull,
campestris, Anthus. See Pipit,
Tawny.
canartius, Serinus. See Serin,
Canary.
candicans, Falco. See Falcon,
Greenland.
candidus, Himantopus.
Black-winged.
canorus, Cuculus.
See Stilt,
See Cuckoo.
INDEX.
cantiaca, Sterna. See Tern, Sand-
wich.
cantiana, Afgialitis.
Kentish. »
canutus, Tringa. See Knot.
Capercaillie (additions), 127.
See Plover,
carolina, Porzana. See Crake,
Carolina.
caryocatactes, Nucifraga. See Nut-
eracker.
casarca, Tadorna. See Sheld-Duck,
Ruddy.
caspia, Sterna. See Tern, Caspian.
castro, Oceanodroma. See Petrel,
Madeiran Fork-tailed.
caudata, Acredula. See Titmouse,
Long-tailed.
Cave, CuHarutes J. P., Note on
Alpine Swift in Pembrokeshire,
381.
certhiola, Locustella. See Warbler,
Pallas’s Grasshopper.
cervinus, Anthus. See Pipit, Red-
throated.
Chaffinch (nestling), 192, 196;
Breeding in Winter, 381, 424.
CHAMPERNOWNE, A. W., Notes on
White Wagtail interbreeding
with Pied Wagtail, 202; Grey
Phalarope in Summer in
Devonshire, 204.
Chiffchaff, throughout the Winter
at Penzance, 247; Geogra-
phical forms of, 343.
—— The East European, in the
Isle of Wight, 233.
chloris, Ligurinus. See Greenfinch.
Chough in Lancashire, 208.
cineraceus, Circus. See Harrier,
Montagu’s.
cinerea, Ardea. See Heron,
Common.
cinerea, Sylvia. See Whitethroat,
Common.
cinereus, Anser. - See Goose, Grey
Lag.
circia, Querquedula. See Garganey.
cirlus, Emberiza. See Bunting,
Cirl.
citrinella, Emberiza. See Bunting,
Yellow.
CLARKE, W. Eactuz, Note on Tufted
Duck in Scotland, 132.
clarkei, Turdus musicus.
Thrush, British Song.
clypeata, Spatula. See Shoveler.
See
431
CosurNn, F., Note on Little Owl in
Warwickshire and Worcester-
shire, 344.
celebs, Fringilla. See Chaffinch.
celestis, Gallinago. See Snipe,
Common.
ceruleus, Parus. See Titmouse,
Blue.
cesia, Sitta. See Nuthatch.
collaris, Accentor. See Accentor,
Alpine.
collurio, Lantus.
backed.
CottrHRuP, C. W., Note on Eggs of
the Cuckoo, 424.
See Shrike, Red-
| communis, Grus. See Crane,
Common.
—— Turtur. See Dove, Turtle
Compton, M. Wtinzar, Note on
Want of Down in Mallards’
Nests, 62.
CONGREVE, W. MarIrLANnpb, Note on
Rare Birds in Pembrokeshire,
Dil:
corax, Corvus. See Raven.
cornix, Corvus. See Crow, Hooded.
cornuta, Tadorna. See Sheld-Duck,
Common.
Courser, Cream-coloured (additions),
149.
CowaRrb,. Ts A, See Newstead,
Robert.
—— Notes on Kentish Plover in
Cheshire, 32; Black Tern in
Cheshire, 33; Pallas’s Sand-
Grouse in Cheshire, 167.
Crake, Baillon’s (additions), 146.
—— Carolina (additions), 129.
—— Corn, Absence in Certain
Counties in 1907, 248.
—— Little (additions), 129.
—— Spotted, in Sussex, 32; (addi-
tions), 129, 417.
Crane, Common, in Anglesey, 62 ;
(additions), 147,417; Bones of,
in Ireland, 276.
crecca, Nettton. See Teal.
Creeper, Tree (nestling), 195.
| cristata, Fuligula. See Duck,
Tufted.
cristatus, Parus. See Titmouse,
Crested.
Crossbill, Breeding in co. Dublin,
203; (additions), 411.
—— Two-barred, in Sussex,
at Fair Isle, 423.
Loa:
432 BRITISH
Crow, Hooded, Marking, 364.
Cuckoo, Habits of the, 66; Method
of Depositing Egg, 131; Notes
on, in India, 197; Courting |
Performance of the, 239;
Arrival in March, 247; Eggs
of, 424.
CumMMINGS, Bruce F., Bird Roosts
and Routes, 119.
Curlew, Common, Nest with Five ©
Eggs, 136; (nestling), 196;
(additions), 270.
—— Stone (additions), 148; in
Yorkshire, 314.
curonica, Algialitis.
Little Ringed.
curruca, Sylvia.
Lesser.
curvirostra, Loxia.
See Plover,
See Whitethroat,
See Crossbill.
dartfordiensis,
datus.
Dartford.
deserti, Saxicola.
Desert.
Dewar, J. M., Field Notes on the
Melizophilus un-
See Warbler, British
See Wheatear,
Powder-down of the Heron,
285.
Dipper in Kent, 347.
Diver, Black-throated (additions),
333, 421.
—— Great Northern, Plumage of,
277 3, Dil of; 387.
—— Red-throated (additions), 333
—— White-billed (additions), 332.
domesticus, Passer. See Sparrow,
House.
dominicus, Charadrius.
Lesser Golden.
Dotterel (additions), 149.
dougalli, Sterna. See Tern, Roseate.
Dove, Stock, Nesting on Buildings,
31; (additions), 125, 416;
Nesting in Lanarkshire, 426.
—— Turtle (additions), 125, 417;
in co. Donegal in Winter,
348.
Dublin Bay, Bird-life in, 171.
Duck, Ferruginous (additions), 57,
416; in Sussex and Brecon-
shire, 377.
—— Long-tailed (Noble),
Hertfordshire, 309 ;
land, 348 ;
See Plover,
Soe” an
Adult In-
(additions), 416.
| Duck, Tufted (Noble), 37;
BIRDS.
(addi-
tions), 83, 416; Unusual Nest-
ing Site and Incubation Period
of, 97; in + Scotland,” 152%
Nesting in the Outer Hebrides,
165; at Fair Isle, 423.
Ducks. See Eider, Gadwall, Gar-
ganey, Golden-Eye, Goosander,
Mallard, Merganser, Pintail,
Pochard, Scaup, Scoter, -
Sheld-Duck; Shoveler, Smew,
Teal, Wigeon.
Ducks’ Eggs, On the Identification
of, 18, 37, 94.
Dunlin, A Marked, 367.
Eagle, White-tailed, in Hereford,
314; in Essex, 383.
eburnea, Pagophila.
Ivory.
Editorial, 1.
Eider Duck (Noble), 39; off South
Devon in April, 31; Incuba-
tion-period of, 65; (additions),
85, 416; Food of, 344, 384.
See Gull,
_ —— King (additions), 86.
erythrina, Pyrrhula.
| europeus, Caprimulgus.
Evuison, Rev. A., Bird-life in a
Spring Snowstorm, 301.
Exton, Henry B., Note on Ampu-
tation of Lapwing’s Toes by
means of Wool, 281.
epops, Upupa. See Hoopoe.
See Grosbeak, |
Scarlet.
erythropus, Anser. See Goose,
Lesser White-fronted.
See Night-
jar
| Evans, C. I., Note on Autumn and
Winter Singing of Buntings, 237.
—— WiLtLiAmM, Notes on Stark’s
Record of the Breeding of the
Scaup-Duck at Loch Leven,
132; Goldecrests from East
Coast Lighthouses, 232.
eversmanni, Phylloscopus trochilus.
See Wren, Willow, Northern
Race.
excubitor, Lanius.
Great Grey.
See Shrike,
Fair Isle, The Birds of, 422.
falcinellus, Plegadis. See
Glossy.
Ibis,
INDEX. 433
Falcon, Greenland (additions), 413. | fulicarius, Phalaropus. See Phala-
——TIceland, in Scotland, 310; rope, Grey.
(additions), 414.
—— Red-footed, in Norfolk, 244;
in Kent, 427.
familiaris, Certhia.
Tree.
FEILDEN, Cot. H. W., Notes on
Climbing Movements
See Creeper,
or) the. |
Green Woodpecker, 93; Some ©
Sussex Ravens, 279.
ferina, Fuligula. See Pochard,
Common.
Finch. See Bullfinch, Chaffinch,
Greenfinch, Hawfinch, Serin.
Flamingo (additions), 24.
flammea, Strix. See Owl, Barn.
flava, Motacilla. See Wagtail, Blue-
headed.
fluviatilis, Sterna.
Common.
See Tern,
fuliginosa, Sterna. See Tern, Sooty.
Fulmar. See Petrel.
fusca, Gidemia. See Scoter, Velvet.
fuscus, Larus. See Gull, Lesser
Black-backed.
| —— Totanus. See Redshank,
Spotted.
Gadwall (Noble), 20, 94; (addi-
tions), 51, 415; in Somerset,
| galactodes, Aedon.
Flycatcher, Pied, Nesting in Ayr- |
shire, 139; (additions), 410.
— — Red-breasted, in Norfolk, 34,
200; Irish Records of, 248,
_ 410; in Barra and at the Butt
of Lewis, 313; (additions),
410.
—— Spotted (nestling), 196.
Food of some British Birds, The,
reviewed, 315.
——of Red-breasted Merganser,
311; of Eider Duck, 344,
384,
Forrest, H. E., Notes on Nut-
hatches breeding at Llan-
dudno, 59; Golden Oriole in
Shropshire, 59; Hoopoe in
Shropshire, 60; Short-eared
Owl Breeding in Pembroke-
shire, 60; An Early Recorded
Waxwing in Wales, 91; Black
Redstarts in Merioneth, 165;
Honey-Buzzard in Shropshire,
204; Smew in Montgomery,
311; Lesser Spotted Wood-
pecker in Merioneth, 343;
Hoopoe in Merioneth, 343;
Velvet Scoter in Shropshire,
345; Red Variety of the
Common Partridge, 345; Chaf-
finch Breeding in Winter, 381,
424,
Fow.LeER, W. WaArRDE, Note on
Little Owl in North-west
Oxfordshire, 280.
100; in Aberdeenshire, 140;
Probable Nesting in Scotland,
245; in Fifeshire, 348, 426;
in Orkney, 426.
See Warbler,
Rufous.
galbula, Oriolus. See Oriole,
Golden.
Gate, A. R., Note on Yellow-
browed Warbler in Yorkshire,
201.
gallicus, Cursorius.
Cream-coloured.
Gallinule, Allen’s (additions), 146.
—— Green-backed, in Norfolk, 134.
gambeli, Anser. See Goose, White-
fronted.
Garganey (Noble), 22; (additions),
54, 415; in Shetland, 245;
Breeding in East Yorkshire,
348.
garrulus, Ampelis. See Waxwing.
Coracias. See Roller.
Gitroy, Norman, Notes on Ducks’
Eggs and Down, 94; Nesting
Habits of the Marsh-Warbler,
See Courser,
235; On the Nesting of the
Goosander, 400.
giu, Scops. See Owl, Scops.
glacialis, Colymbus. See Diver,
Great Northern.
—— Fulmarus. See Petrel, Ful-
mar.
—— Harelda. See Duck, Long-
tailed.
GLADSTONE, Hues S8., Note on Red
Grouse and Black Grouse Hy-
brids, 425.
glandarius, Garrulus.
glareola, Totanus.
Wood.
See Jay.
See Sandpiper,
454.
glaucion, Clangula. See Golden-
Kye.
glaucus, Larus. See Gull, Glaucous.
Godwit, Bar-tailed (additions), 419.
— — Black-tailed, in Kent,
(additions), 270, 419; at Fair
Isle, 424. |
Goldcrest. See Wren, Golden-
crested.
Golden-Eye (Noble), 38; (addi-
tions), 416.
Goosander (Noble), 40; (additions),
87, 416; in Bedfordshire, 384 ;
Notes on the Nesting of the,
400.
Goose, Bean (additions), 25.
—— Brent (additions), 27.
—— Greater Snow (additions), 27.
—— Grey Lag (additions), 24, 415.
—— Lesser White-fronted (addi-
tions), 25.
—— Pink-footed (additions), 26.
—— Snow (additions), 27; in co.
Mayo, 348.
White-fronted (additions), 25.
GRABHAM, OxLEy, The Colony of |
Little Terns at Spurn Point,
Yorkshire, 317.
graculus, Phalacrocorax. See Shag.
—— Pyrrhocorax. See Chough.
gravis, Puffinus. See Shearwater,
Great.
Gray, LEoNARD, Note on Lesser
Redpoll Nesting in Essex, 203.
Grebe, Black-necked,
Laneashire, 282; in Hertford-
shire, 309, 426; on the Solway,
314; (additions), 368, 421.
—— Great Crested, Late Nests of,
171, 242; in Scotland, 246;
(additions), 333, 421.
—— Little, Late Nests of, 171, 242.
—— Red-necked (additions), 333.
—— Slavonian (additions), 334,
421; in Hertfordshire, 426.
Greenfinch (nestling), 192, 196.
gregarius, Vanellus. See Plover,
Sociable.
griseigena, Podicipes. See Grebe,
Red-necked.
griseus, Macrorhamphus. See Snipe,
Red-breasted.
—— Nycticorax. See Heron,
Night.
—— Puffinus. See Shearwater,
Sooty.
99; |
in North.
| —— Common,
|- —_— ——— Mediterranean
| grylle, Uria.
BRITISH BIRDS.
grisola, Muscicapa. See Flycatcher,
Spotted.
Grosbeak, Scarlet, on the Isle of
May, 346.
Grouse, Black (additions), 127,
417; Supposed from _ Irish
Caves, 167.
—— Red (additions), 128; and Black
Grouse Hybrids, 384, 425.
—— Sand. See Sand-Grouse.
See Guillemot, Black.
Guillemot, Black (additions), 332.
— — Briinnich’s (additions), 331; in
the Firth of Forth, 425.
Incubation period
of, 65.
Gull, Black-headed, Abnormal Eggs
of, 64; Food of, 316.
(addi-
tions), 328.
| —— Glaucous (additions), 328, 420.
| —— Great Black-backed (addi-
tions), 420.
—— Herring, Incubation Period
of, 65.
— Yellow-legged
tions), 328.
—— Iceland (additions), 329, 420.
(addi-
_ —— Ivory (additions), 329.
—— Kittiwake (additions), 420;
Nesting Records of, in the Isle
of Wight, 425.
—— Lesser Black-backed, Incuba-
tion Period of, 65; (additions),
420. ;
—— Little (additions), 327, 420.
—— Sabine’s, in Norfolk, 208; in
Lincolnshire, 241; in the Inner
Hebrides, 246; (additions),
327.
—— Wedge-tailed (additions), 327.
Gulls, Marking, 366.
GuRNEY, J. H., Note on Grey-
headed Wagtail in Sussex, 90.
Haicu, G. H. Caton, Notes on
Barred Warbler in Lincoln-
shire, 232; Yellow-browed
Warbler in Lincolnshire, 233 ;
Buff-breasted Sandpiper in
Lincolnshire, 241; Sabine’s
Gull in Lincolnshire, 241.
Hate, Rev. J. R., Note on Increase
of Wood-Pigeons in Orkney,
345.
INDEX.
haliaetus, Pandion. See Osprey.
Harrier, Marsh, in Norfolk, 93;
(additions), 412.
—— Montagu’s, in Surrey,
im) Ireland, 310:
412.
Harrison, T., Note on Change of
Nesting Sites through Human
Influence, 99.
140;
(additions),
HARTERT, Dr. Ernst, On the
British Bullfineh, 130.
HarviE-Brown, J. A., Notes on
the Distribution of the Common
Scoter in Secotland, 134;
. Tufted Ducks Nesting in the
Outer Hebrides, 165.
Hastings and East Sussex Naturalist,
Reviewed, 427.
Hawfinch (nestling), 192; in Scot-
land, 243; in Summer in East
Lothian, 314; (additions), 410;
at Fair Isle, 423.
HERBERT, F. A., Have Starlings
increased beyond the Capacity
of Nesting Sites, 92.
Heron, Common, Field Notes on
the Powder-Down of __ the,
285.
—— Night (additions), 414; in
Kent, 427.
—— Purple, in Norfolk, 35; in
Caithness, 244.
Heronries, Scottish, 244; Lincoln-
shire and Somersetshire, 283.
hiaticula, Mgialitis. See Plover,
Ringed.
Hobby Nesting in Sussex,
(additions), 414.
Hoopoe in Shropshire, 60; in Ross-
shire, 208; in Merioneth, 343 ;
(additions), 412.
376 :
hortensis, Sylvia. See Warbler,
Garden.
Hunter, R. Hamitton, Note on
Crossbill Breeding in co.
Dublin, 203.
hybrida, Hydrochelidon. See Tern,
Whiskered.
hyperboreus, Chen. See Goose,
Snow.
—— Phalaropus. See Phalarope,
Red-necked.
Hypolais sp. See Warbler, Icterine.
hypoleucus, Totanus. See Sand-
piper, Common.
_ interpres, Strepsilas.
ADS
Ibis, Glossy, in Northumberland
and Cornwall, 244 ; (additions),
415.
egnicapillus, Regulus.
Fire-crested.
tliacus, Turdys. See Redwing.
impennis, Alca. See Auk, Great.
Incubation Periods, 64, 97.
INGRAM, COLLINGWooD, Note on
Red Variety of the Common
Partridge, 311.
See Wren,
See Turnstone.
Ireland, Rare Birds in, 276.
Irish Birds, 276.
A List of, reviewed, 248.
Falco. See Falcon,
tslandicus,
Iceland.
espida, Alcedo.
See Kingfisher.
Jackdaw, Domed Nests of, 139.
JACKSON, ANNIE C., on the Mouth-
coloration of some Nestling
Birds, 195.
_ Jay in Ireland, 248.
| lapponicus, Calcarius.
Kersarn, Rev; J ses “Notes son
Nesting Records of the Kitti-
wake in the Isle of Wight, 425.
Kent, The Birds of, 378.
Kingfisher (nestling), 194; Late
Nest of, 204; (additions),
411.
KirKMAN, F. B., Variation in the
Nests of the Arctic and Common
Terns, 78, 101.
Kite, Black (additions), 413.
_ Knot (additions), 268, 418.
lagopus, Buteo. See Buzzard,
Rough-legged.
lapponica, Limosa.
Bar-tailed.
See Godwit,
See Bunting,
Lapland.
Lapwing, Nest with Five Eggs, 136 ;
(nestling),196; (additions), 228;
Amputation of Toes by Means
of Wool, 281; Eggs Hatching
after a Snowstorm, 302.
Lark, Sky (nestling), 194, 196.
456
Leiau, A. G., Notes on Redshank
Breeding in Warwickshire, 33 ;
Curious Site for a Robin’s
Nest, 90; Late Nests of the
Great Crested and Little Grebes,
171; Little Owl,in Warwick-
shire, 240.
lentiginosus, Botaurus. See Bittern,
American.
leucoptera, Hydrochelidon. See
Tern, White-winged Black.
leucopterus, Larus. See Gull,
Iceland.
See Spoonbill.
See Petrel,
leucorodia, Platalea.
leucorrhoa, Procellaria.
Leach’s Fork-tailed.
—— Saxicola enanthe.
ear, Greenland.
longicaudata, Bartramia.
piper, Bartram’s.
lugubris, Motacilla.
Pied.
luscinia, Daulias.
See Wheat-
See Sand-
See Wagtail,
See Nightingale.
luscinioides, Locustella. See War-
bler, Savi’s.
LynEs, Com. H., z.n., Note on
Pebble Nest of a Ringed
Plover, 136.
MacxkeitH, T. THornton, Note on
the Courting Performance of
the Cuckoo, 239.
macrura, Sterna. See Tern, Arctic.
macularius, Totanus. See Sand-
piper, Spotted.
maculata, Tringa.
Pectoral.
MacratH, Mayor H. A. F., Notes
on the Common Cuckoo in
India, 197.
major, Dendrocopus. See Wood-
pecker, Great Spotted.
—— Gallinago. See Snipe, Great.
Parus. See Titmouse, Great.
Mallard (Noble), 20; Want of
Down in Nests of, 62; Hatch-
ing in October, 245.
MapuetTon, H. W., on the Song of
the Wood-Warbler, 226.
Mapping Migratory Birds in their
Nesting Areas, On a Plan of,
Bue.
marila, Fuligula.
martius, Picus.
Black.
See Sandpiper,
See Scaup-Duck.
See Woodpecker,
BRITISH BIRDS.
maruetta, Porzana. See Crake,
Spotted.
marinus, Larus.
Black-backed.
Marked Birds, 35, 171, 245, 246.
Marking Birds, A Plan for, 35.
Notes on the Work at the
Rossitten Station, 362.
MarrRiaGE, A. W., Note on Little
Owl in Hampshire, 310.
Martin, Sand (nestling), 192.
May, Isle of, Rare Birds on the, 346.
May, W. Norman, Note on Grey
Wagtail Nesting in Berkshire,
90.
MEADE-WALDo, E. G. B., Notes on
Pied Wagtail Rearing Three
Broods, 130; Old English
Nesting Bottles, 164.
Mep.uicott, W. 8., Note on Curious
Site of a Wood-Warbler’s Nest,
380.
See Gull, Great
melanocephala, Motacilla. See Wag-
tail, Black-headed.
mclanocephalus, Larus. See Gull,
Mediterranean Black-headed.
melanope, Motacilla. See Wagtail,
Grey.
melba, Cypselus.
merganser, Mergus.
Merganser, Red-breasted
40; Food of, 311.
merula, Turdus. See Blackbird.
Meyrick, Cou. H., Note on Autumn
and Winter Singing of Buntings,
237.
migrans, Milvus. See Kite, Black.
(Migration) ‘“‘ Report on the Immi-
grations of Summer Residents
in the Spring of 1907,” Re-
viewed, 247.
—— On a Plan of Mapping Mi-
gratory Birds in their Nesting
Areas, 322.
Minas, J. G., Note on Red Grouse
and Black Grouse Hybrids, 384.
minor, Dendrocopus. See Wood-
pecker, Lesser Spotted.
minuta, Ardetta. See Bittern, Little.
Sterna. See Tern, Little.
—— Tringa. See Stint, Little.
minutilla, Tringa. See Stint,
American.
minutus, Larus.
modularis, Accentor.
Hedge.
See Swift, Alpine.
See Goosander.
(Noble),
See Gull, Little.
See Sparrow,
INDEX. 437
mollissima, Somateria. See Eider | Nicuoxts, J. B., Notes on Black-
Duck. headed Wagtail in Kent, 165 ;
monedula, Corvus. See Jackdaw. Two-barred Crossbill in Sussex,
montana, Perdix. See Partridge, 165.
Common. Nicott, M. J., The Large-billed
montanus, Passer. See Sparrow, Reed-Bunting in Kent, 88;
Tree. Notes on a Sussex Rufous
montifringilla, Fringilla. See Warbler, 201; Pectoral Sand-
Brambling. piper and Bartram’s Sandpiper
morinellus, Eudromias. See in Kent; 205°: The, First
Dotterel. British Example of the Red-_
Mutitens, W. H., Some _ Early throated Pipit, 278.
British Ornithologists and their Nightingale in Derbyshire, 66;
Works :—I. William ‘Turner, (additions), 407.
5; .1T: Richard Carew, 42;
Ill. Christopher Merrett, 109
and 151; IV. Martin Martin,
Las. Ve Robert: Plot; 21s’;
VI. Thomas Pennant, 259;
VII. John Ray and Francis
Willughby, 290; VIII. Thomas
Bewick and George Montagu,
Si: dt William Mac-
gillivray and William Yarrell,
389.
Murpocu, G. W., Note on a Late
Nest of the Kingfisher, 204.
musicus, Turdus. See Thrush, Song.
mutus, Lagopus. See Ptarmigan.
neevia, Locustella. See Warbler,
Grasshopper.
neglecta, CU strelata.
Schlegel’s.
neglectus, Anser. See Goose, Bean.
Netson, T. H., Note on Pallas’s
Sand-Grouse in Yorkshire, 134.
Nesting Bottles, Old English, 164.
—— Sites, Change of, through
Human Influence, 99.
Nestlings, The Down-plumage and
Mouth-coloration of some,
See Petrel,
186; the Mouth-coloration of
some, 195.
Nests, Variation in the, of the
Arctic and Common Terns, 78,
101.
NEWSTEAD, ALFRED, Note on
Common Crane in Anglesey, 62.
—— RoseEert, and T. A. Cowarp,
On the Occurrence of Schlegel’s
Petrel in Cheshire, 14.
Newton, Life of the late Prof.
ALFRED, 422.
Nightjar Breeding in Captivity, 244.
nigra, CUdemia. See Scoter,
Common,
—— Hydrochelidon. See Tern,
Black.
nigricollis, Podicipes. See Grebe,
Black-necked.
nisoria, Sylvia. See Warbler,
Barred.
nivalis, Chen. See Goose, Greater
Snow.
—— Plectrophenax. See Bunting,
Snow.
Nosie, HEATLEY, On the "Tdenti-
fication of Ducks’ Eggs, 18, 37,
94; Notes on Supposed Wild
Swans on Coll, 61; Common
Terns on the Holyhead Sker-
ries, 64,
noctua, Athene. See Owl, Little.
Norfolk, Birds in, in 1907, 34.
Nutcracker, An Escaped, 28, 92;
in Norfolk, 35 ; (additions), 411.
Nuthatch: Breeding at Llandudno,
59; in Pembrokeshire, 378.
nyroca, Fuligula. See Duck,
Ferruginous.
oceanicus, Oceanites. See Petrel,
Wilson’s.
ochropus. Totanus.
Green.
enanthe, Saxicola.
Common.
aenas, Columba.
eruginosus, Circus.
Marsh.
OGILVIE-GRANT, W. R., Notes on
the Northern Marsh-Titmouse
in England, 277; Red Grouse
and Black Grouse Hybrids, 386.
See Sandpiper,
See Wheatear,
See Dove, Stock.
See Harrier,
438
OLDHAM, CHARLES, Notes on Lesser
Redpoll Nesting in Surrey, 91 ;
Cirl Bunting Singing in October,
204; Slavonian and _ Black-
necked Grebes in Hertford-
shire, 426.
Oriole, Golden, in Shropshire, 59 ;
in Fifeshire, 138; in Lincoln-
shire, 208; (additions), 409; at
Fair Isle, 423.
Ornithologists, Some Early British.
and their Works :—I. William
Turner, 5; II. Richard Carew,
42; III. Christopher Merrett.
109. and) Voh: » FVe Martin
Martin, 173; V. Robert Plot,
218; VI... Thomas
259; VII. John Ray and
Francis Willughby, 290; VIII.
Thomas Bewick and George
Montagu, 351; IX. William
Macgillivray and William
Yarrell, 389.
Osprey in Ireland, 277;
383 ; (additions), 414.
ostralegus, Hamatopus. See Oyster-
Catcher.
otus, Asio. See Owl, Long-eared.
Owl, Barn (Luminous), 35.
—— Little, in Wiltshire, 100; in
Warwickshire, 240, 344; in
North-west Oxfordshire, 280;
in Hampshire, 310; in Wor-
cestershire, 344; (additions),
412.
—-— Long-eared, in Shetland, 426.
—— Scops, in Cumberland, 100;
in Fifeshire, 140; off Aberdeen-
shire, 204.
— — Short-eared, Breeding in Not-
tinghamshire, 30; in the
Isle of Man, 36; Breeding in
Pembrokeshire, 60.
—— Snowy, in the Outer Hebrides,
140; (additions), 412.
Oyster-Catcher, Incubation Period
of, 65; Method of Feeding on
the Edible Mussel, 168; (nest-
ling), 196.
in Essex,
paludosus, Anser. See Goose, Bean.
palumbus, Columba. See Pigeon,
Wood.
palustris, Emberiza pyrrhuloides.
See Bunting, Large-billed Reed.
Pennant,:
| —— Fulmar (additions),
_ Phalarope,
— phenicurus, Ruticilla.
BRITISH BIRDS.
| palustris, Parus. See Titmouse,
Marsh.
| paradoxus, Syrrhaptes. See Sand-
Grouse, Pallas’s.
parasiticus, Stercorarius. See Skua,
Buftfon’s.
ParRKIN, THomaAs, Note on the
Black-throated Thrush in Kent,
315s
Partridge, Common (additions),
128; Red Variety of the, 311,
345.
—— Red-legged (additions), 128;
Remarkable Variety of, 240.
parva, Muscicapa. See Flycatcher,
Red-breasted.
—— Porzana. See Crake, Little.
parvulus, Troglodytes. See Wren,
Common.
Pastor. See Starling, Rose-coloured.
Paton, E. R., Note on Scops Owl off
Aberdeenshire, 204.
Prarson, C. E., Note on Pheasant
and Teal Laying in the same
Nest, 98.
pelagica, Procellaria. See Petrel,
Storm.
Pembrokeshire, Rare Birds in,
377.
penelope, Mareca. See Wigeon.
PENROSE, Dr. F. G., Note on Barred
Warbler in Norfolk, 200.
perspicillata, Gdemia. See Scoter,
Surf.
Petrel, Bulwer’s, in Sussex, 282;
(additions), 373.
31a, a2
in Lancashire, 388.
—— Leach’s Fork-tailed, in Cum-
berland and Laneashire, 282;
(additions), 369.
—— Madeiran Fork-tailed
tions), 369.
—-— Schlegel’s, in Cheshire, 14.
(addi-
_ —— Storm (additions), 369.
Wilson’s (additions), 369.
Grey, in Summer in
Devonshire, 204; (additions),
229, 417; in co. Wexford, 240;
in Pembrokeshire, 377.
Red-necked (acini:
- 418.
229,
| Pheasant and Teal ania in same
Nest, 98.
See Red-
start, Common.
INDEX.
Pigeon, Wood, Nesting on a House,
100; (nestling), 196; Diph-
theria, the Results of the
* British Birds ’’ Inquiry, 69 ;
Renewed Inquiry, 199, 309;
Increase of, in Orkney, 345.
pileata, Pyrrhula pyrrhula. See
Bullfineh, British.
Pintail (Noble), 21; (additions),
54, 415; in Shetland, 140.
Pipit, Meadow (nestling), 191, 196.
—— Red-throated (nestling), 191;
the First British Example, 278 ;
at Fair Isle, 423.
—— Richard’s, in Norfolk, 279; at
Fair Isle, 423.
—— Tawny, nesting in Sussex, 427.
—— Tree, On the Eggs of, 335;
(additions), 409.
—— Water, in Ireland, 276; (addi-
tions), 409.
platyrhyncha, Limicola. See Sand-
piper, Broad-billed.
Plover, Golden, Nest with Five
Eggs, 136.
—— Kentish, in Cheshire, 32;
(additions), 150.
—— Killdeer (additions), 150 ;
Kent, 169.
—-— Lesser Golden (additions), 150.
—— Little Ringed, in North Uist,
388.
—— Ringed, Incubation Period of,
65; Abnormal Eggs of, 134 ;
Pebble Nest of, 136; (addi-
tions), 150.
—— Sociable (additions), 150. ,
Pochard, Common (Noble), 23;
(additions), 56, 416; Nesting in
Lincolnshire, 95; Nesting in
South-west Kent, 96; Nesting
in Ireland, 248; Nesting in
North Kent, 383.
in
— — Red-crested (additions), 56,
416.
pomatorhinus, Stercorarius. See
Skua, Pomatorhine.
pomeranus, Lanius. See Shrike,
Woodchat.
Powder-Down of the Heron, Field
Notes on the, 285.
pratensis, Anthus. See Pipit,
Meadow.
—— OCrex. See Crake, Corn.
pratincola, Glareola. See Pratin-
cole.
_ pusilla, Emberiza.
| Rail, Land.
Pratineole (additions), 149; at
the Flannan Islands, 245.
| Protection of Birds, Comparative
Legislation for the, 340; in
Yorkshire, 378.
Ptarmigan (additions), 128, 417;
supposed, from Irish Caves, 167.
pubescens, Dendrocopus. Wood-
pecker, Downy.
| Puffin, Incubation Period of, 65.
| pugnax, Machetes. See Ruff.
| purpurea, Ardea. See Heron,
Purple, 35.
See Bunting,
Little.
PycraFrr, W. P., Notes on Nest
and Nestlings of the Bearded
Tit, 58; Marsh-Harrier in
Norfolk, 93; A Remarkable
Variety of the Red-legged
Partridge in Essex, 240.
pyrrhula, Pyrrhula. See Bullfinch,
Northern.
See Crake, Corn.
_ Ravens, Some Sussex, 279.
Razorbill, Incubation Period of, 65.
RATTRAY; Cor. R. H., Note on
Lapwing’s Nest with Five Eggs,
136.
Redbreast. See Robin.
Redpoll, Lesser, Nesting in Surrey,
91; Nesting in Middlesex, 100 ;
(nestling), 193, 196; Nesting
in Essex, 203; Nesting in
Sussex, 208.
Redshank Breeding in Warwick-
shire, 33: Inland Nesting of,
99; Nest with Five Eggs, 136 ;
(nestling), 196.
——~ Spotted, in Kent, 99;
tions), 270, 419.
Redstart, Black, in Merioneth, 165 ;
in Ireland, 276; in the Outer
Hebrides and Fife, 313; in co.
Waterford, 346; (additions), 407.
—— Common (additions), 406.
Redwing, Albinistic Variety of, 277.
richardi, Anthus. See Pipit,
Richard’s.
Ricuarps, F. I., Notes on Yellow-
browed Warblers, Red-breasted
Flycatchers, ete., in Norfolk,
200; Blue-headed Wagtail in
Norfolk, 237.
(addi-
440
ridibundus, Larus. See Gull, Black-
headed.
Rintour, LEonorA J. See BAXTER,
EVELYN V.
riparia, Cotile. See Martin, Sand.
RIvVIERE, B. B., Note on Stock-
Dove Nesting on Buildings, 31.
Robin, Curious Site for a Nest, 90; |
(nestling), 189; Continental, in ©
Isle of Wight, 248; Eggs
Hatching after a Snowstorm,
303; British. on the Isle of
May, 346.
Rositnson, H. W., Notes on Great
Grey Shrike in Scotland, 165 ;
Distribution of the Common
Scoter in Scotland, 166; Black-
necked Grebes in North Laneca- |
shire, 282; lLeach’s’ Fork-
tailed Petrel in Cumberland
and Lancashire, 282; Song-
Thrush’s Nest in December,
309; Food of the Red-
breasted Merganser, Shi Be
Food of the Eider Duck, 344;
Fulmar Petrel in Lancashire, |
388.
Roller (additions), 411; in Cumber-
land, 426.
Roosts and Routes, Bird, 119.
rosea, Rhodostethia. See
Wedge-tailed.
roseus, Pastor. See Starling, Rose-
Gull,
coloured.
—— Phenicopterus. See Flamingo.
ROTHSCHILD, THE Hon. L. W.,
Note on Unusual Birds in
Hertfordshire, 309.
rubecula, Erithacus. See Robin.
rubrirostris, Anser. See Goose, Grey
Lag.
rufa, Caccabis. See Partridge, Red-
legged.
rujfescens, Linota. See Redpoll,
Lesser.
—— Tringites. See Sandpiper,
Buff-breasted.
Ruff in co. Clare, 208; (additions),
268, 419. |
rufina, Netta. See Pochard, Red- |
crested.
rustica, Hmberiza. See Bunting, |
Rustic.
—— Hirundo. See Swallow.
rusticula, Scolopax. See Woodcock.
| scoticus, Lagopus.
| serrator, Mergus.
BRITISH BIRDS.
sabinii, Xema. See Gull, Sabine’s.
Sanderling in Kent in July, 137;
(additions), 418.
Sand-Grouse, Pallas’s, in England,
98; (additions), 126; in York-
shire and Kent, 134; in
Cheshire, 167; in Essex, 208 :
in Yorkshire, 245; in Hert-
fordshire, 309.
Sandpiper, Bartram’s, in Kent,
205; (additions), 269.
—— Broad-billed (additions), 267.
— — Buff-breasted, in Lincolnshire,
241; (additions), 269.
—— Common, Nest with Five Eggs,
136; (nestling), 196.
—— Curlew, in Kent in July, 137;
(additions), 268, 418.
—— Green (additions), 269.
—— Pectoral, in Kent, 205; im
Norfolk, 206; (additions), 267.
—— Purple, in the Channel
Islands, 33; (additions), 418.
—— Solitary, Nest with Five Eggs,
136; ‘in Kent, © tate Sia
(additions), 269.
| —— Spotted (additions), 269.
| —— Wood (additions),
269, 419;
at Fair Isle, 424.
scandiaca, Nyctea. See Owl, Snowy.
Scaup-Duck (Noble), 38; (addi-
tions), 85, 416; Stark’s Record
of the Breeding of, at Loch
Leven, 132; On the Nesting
of, in Scotland, 209 ; Correction,
283; in Nottinghamshire, 280.
scolopax, Gidicnemus. See Curlew,
Stone.
Seoter, Common (Noble), 39 ; (addi-
tions), 86; Distribution of, in
Scotland, 134, 166.
—— Surf (additions), 87.
—— Velvet (Noble), 40; in Shrop-
shire, 345.
See Grouse, Red.
segetum, Anser. See Goose, Bean. 
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11